SuttaCentral
Bhante, not sure if you noticed this: The verse of Ja10 is identical with a verse in Thag11.1 (Thag11.1:4.1-4; except for the address to the king, which is replaced by a reference to “bhikkhu”).
Both are translated differently, and there is no note in Ja10.
This includes reading the marks of gems, cloth, clubs, swords, spears, arrows, weapons, women, men, boys, girls, male and female bondservants, elephants, horses, buffaloes, bulls, cows, goats, rams, chickens, quails, monitor lizards, rabbits, tortoises, or deer.
Seyyathidaṁ—maṇilakkhaṇaṁ vatthalakkhaṇaṁ daṇḍalakkhaṇaṁ satthalakkhaṇaṁ asilakkhaṇaṁ usulakkhaṇaṁ dhanulakkhaṇaṁ āvudhalakkhaṇaṁ itthilakkhaṇaṁ purisalakkhaṇaṁ
DN2
missing bow, between arrow and weapon.
In segment 57.2; and the same also in DN1:1.22.2.
AN5.28:7.1: Evaṁ bhāvite kho, bhikkhave, bhikkhu ariye pañcaṅgike sammāsamādhimhi evaṁ bahulīkate yassa yassa abhiññāsacchikaraṇīyassa dhammassa cittaṁ abhininnāmeti abhiññāsacchikiriyāya, tatra tatreva sakkhibhabbataṁ pāpuṇāti sati sati āyatane.
When the noble right immersion with five factors is cultivated in this way, a mendicant extends the mind to realize by insight each and every thing that can be realized by insight; and they are capable of realizing those things, since each and every one is within range.
The word bahulīkata is not translated; also in some other segments.
In da27
King Ajātaśatru was then on the road and told Prince Jīvaka, “Good, good! Now, you’ve been a great benefit to me! You praised the Tathāgata’s guidance and edification, and afterward you led me to a visit with the Bhagavān. I attained that my awakening.
which is kind of weird for a person who had committed patricide, but I guess 得蒙開悟 means just that.
Paging @cdpatton
(20 more characters.)
Misspelling in comment to MN26:15.9
The word highlighted should be spelt “remuneration”. It’s commonly misspelt as “renumeration”.
DN18:27.11 deathare → death are
DN18:27.12 footnote 620: 25km/2 → 25km2
DN19:44.12 A → As
DN19:45.5 I’m a skilled in what is beneficial → I’m skilled in what is beneficial
Comma insertion before the word “too” is somewhat inconsistent? Eg. with comma: DN18:27.13 & DN16:4.4.1; without comma: DN19:47.42 & DN16:3.23.1
DN20:10.4 footnote 706 has an extra underscore and in the pdf ebook the italics are misplaced: [The Sanskrit names are kiṭi, vikiṭi, bhṛgu, and bhṛkuṭi. Only bhṛgu_ is attested] → [The Sanskrit names are kiṭi, vikiṭi, bhṛgu, and bhṛkuṭi. Only bhṛgu is attested]
SN52.8:3.4: Kathañcāvuso, bhikkhu cattāro satipaṭṭhāne bhāveti, cattāro satipaṭṭhāne bahulīkarotīti?
And how does a mendicant develop the four kinds of mindfulness meditation?
Bahulīkaroti is missing in translation.
MN78:6.1: Atha kho pañcakaṅgo thapati uggāhamānassa paribbājakassa samaṇamuṇḍikāputtassa bhāsitaṁ neva abhinandi nappaṭikkosi.
Then Pañcakaṅga neither approved nor dismissed that mendicant’s statement.
It’s not “that mendicant”, but “the wanderer Uggāhamāna”.
Right, tāni is plural and must refer to to rūpāni rather than the attainment as a whole.
Ugg, this is really tricky. The range of contexts really requires that we retain “form” in some way, as it contrasts with “formless”. But the closest we have to an equivalent noun is “formed”. Let’s try that and see.
Thanks, I’ve fixed this.
Use either “reprimand” or “denounce” for upavad. For ariyānaṁ upavādakā, “denounce”.
“Spoke ill of” is a little weak. Say you hear a Dhamma talk from someone you think is an Arya. Someone asks, “ghow was the talk?” and you say, “TBH a bit boring”. Is that bad kamma resulting in bad rebirth? No it is not! But if you say, “those aryas really don’t understand the Dhamma”, then yeah, that’s what it means, to “denounce”.
“chose to act out”
Indeed. However the system is supposed to deal with this: where we have an official Bilara translation, it should display the sutta translation title by default, and only use the “system” title as a fallback. Checking the latest generated files this problem is fixed already, but we should keep an eye out for it.
In cases like this where “money” is listed as a separate item I use “gold and silver”.
Yes, let’s make it consistent.
Okay, this is an extremely dubious passage.
The identification of this bird with the “golden oriole” is from Dhammika, who accepts the reading ambaka in the sense of “mango”, i.e. a mango-colored bird, which does indeed describe the golden oriole.
Against this is the fact that its call, while not as sweet as a cuckoo’s, is still quite pleasant.
And here’s the cuckoo:
The name of the sweet-sounding caller is either phussaka or purisaka. Now phussaka is supported by the Sanskrit parapuṣṭa, “cuckoo”. The alternative form purisaka might also refer to a cuckoo, as the cuckoo’s call is widely interpreted as being “human-like”.
On the other hand, the commentary takes one as the name of a “large chicken” and the other a “small chicken”, which Ven Bodhi translates as “cock” and “chick”.
The Chinese parallel offers yet another reading, identifying the sounds as “woman” (ambaka) and “man” (purisaka). But I doubt these would offer a clear contrast so that one was considered pleasant, the other not.
Now, returning to the text, the ill-sounding caller is called either ambukasañcarī, “water-wanderer”, or ambakamaddarī, “mango-crusher”. The latter, if it were to make sense, would more likely refer to a creature that feasted on mangoes than one that is colored like mango.
Now, amidst all this confusion, we do have some clarity.
The marsh hen or moorhen is:
So I’ll revise my translation, use “marsh hen” here. This is also the sense accepted by DPD.
Just “native gold”.
Hmm, it can be either just “gold” or a particular kind of gold coin. Anyway, here just make it “gold or silver”.
No, thank you for helping so much!
I missed this, thanks!
Interestingly, this suggests a change in grammar for Thag 11.1. Ja 1 is unambiguously vocative (rāja), so we should probably take bhikkhu here as also vocative, although it can also be read as nominative (which the commentary does).
great, thanks.
Oh my god.
Yes, probably more of a feel thing …
I’ve fixed the rest, this is really great attention!
There’s a typo in the sutta card for MA 189: its title is listed as 勝道 (supreme path) instead of 聖道 (noble path).
There’s also a typo in the title of MA 192: It should read 加樓烏陀夷 not 家樓烏陀夷.
And MA 193: 牛犁破群那 should be 牟犁破群那.
For some reason, the first characters somehow were corrupted, it seems.
Charles, are you able to make these changes directly?
Normally if I look for such things I just search directly on the bilara-data repo, these are probably in the name files.
DN29:38.2 missing single quotation marks & is
The self is has form and is free of disease after death, and say, ‘Reverends, is this what you say, "The self is has form and is free of disease after death”?’
→
‘The self is has form and is free of disease after death,’ and say, ‘Reverends, is this what you say, "The self is has form and is free of disease after death”?’
DN30:2.10.5 footnote 250: eye lashes → eyelashes
DN31:5.1 footnote 264: First we learned what the bad deeds where → First we learned what the bad deeds were
DN32:3.1 footnote 275: “which is s synonym of paritta. → “which is a synonym of paritta.
Thanks, I’ve fixed these.
Yes, @Snowbird pointed to the file to correct. I’m reviewing it and correcting the mistakes. There’s a few more than what I found initially.
The title of Ja13 kaṇḍijātaka is translated “the reed”. While the meaning of “stem” or “stalk” is within the scope of meaning of kaṇḍa, this has no relation to the story, nor to the verse. “Arrow” however would fit very well, and that’s also how it is translated in the respective name file.
Why this change?
Excellent, thanks, let me know if I can help.
Just a mistake! Usually I just translate the whole thing naively from start to finish, to get an idea what it’s about, then go back and fix it all up. In this case I overlooked fixing the title.
MN77:6.19: so ca kho sāvakānaṁ na sakkato na garukato na mānito na pūjito, na ca pana pūraṇaṁ kassapaṁ sāvakā sakkatvā garuṁ katvā upanissāya viharanti.
But he’s not honored, respected, revered, venerated, and esteemed by his disciples. And his disciples, not honoring and respecting him, don’t remain loyal to him.
The Pali has four different past participles for veneration here, the English has five. There are similar sequences elsewhere where the Pali has still apacita as a fifth, but not here. (Again in segment 6.32.)
Dhiratthu is sometimes “shame on”, sometimes “cursed be”.
AN6.90:1.1: “Chayime, bhikkhave, dhammā diṭṭhisampannassa puggalassa pahīnā.
“Mendicants, a person accomplished in view has given up six things.
Has given up these six things.
AN7.64:1.7: Kodhanoyaṁ, bhikkhave, purisapuggalo kodhābhibhūto kodhapareto, kiñcāpi so hoti sunhāto suvilitto kappitakesamassu odātavatthavasano;
An irritable person, overcome and overwhelmed by anger, is ugly, even though they’re nicely bathed and anointed, with hair and beard dressed, and wearing white clothes.
Purisapuggala is normally translated as “individual”, not “person”. This appears several times in this sutta.
Again several times in AN10.104.
AN8.81:2.2: Hirottappe sati hirottappasampannassa upanisasampanno hoti indriyasaṁvaro.
When there is conscience and prudence, a person who has fulfilled conscience and prudence has fulfilled a vital condition for sense restraint.
In all other cases in this sutta it says “one who has fulfilled …”, only here we find “a person”.
AN10.54:5.5: Evamevaṁ kho, bhikkhave, tena bhikkhunā tesaṁyeva kusalānaṁ dhammānaṁ paṭilābhāya adhimatto chando ca vāyāmo ca ussāho ca ussoḷhī ca appaṭivānī ca sati ca sampajaññañca karaṇīyaṁ.
In the same way, in order to get those skillful qualities, that person should apply intense enthusiasm …
Should be “that mendicant”.
In Chinese translation of MN3
比丘們！這裡，如果我是已吃飽、已滿足、已圓滿、已完結、已滿腹、盡我所需者，而我的施食會成為殘餘法、應該捨棄法
The highlighted translation seems a bit out of place. It looks like literal translations of atirekadhammo chaḍḍanīyadhammo: 殘餘法 (left over Dhamma)、應該捨棄法 (Dhamma to be discarded) instead of 殘餘食 (left over food)，應該捨棄食 (food to be discarded)。
Even MA88 has it translated as 殘食 instead of 殘餘法. So, I think it’s a mistake. The same translation is repeated several times
3 posts were merged into an existing topic: SuttaCentral: bug reports
