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.
The translation for virāga, fading away, is missing from MN 64
This is peaceful; this is sublime—that is, the stilling of all activities, the letting go of all attachments, the ending of craving, [fading away], cessation, extinguishment.’
‘etaṁ santaṁ etaṁ paṇītaṁ yadidaṁ sabbasaṅkhārasamatho sabbūpadhipaṭinissaggo taṇhākkhayo virāgo nirodho nibbānan’ti
In AN 1.394-574 the word “finger-snap” is spelled with a hyphen throughout, but in the title the hyphen has been removed. The same in AN 1.51-60.
AN3.105:1.1: “No cedaṁ, bhikkhave, loke assādo abhavissa, nayidaṁ sattā loke sārajjeyyuṁ.
“Mendicants, if there were no gratification in the world, sentient beings wouldn’t be aroused by it. AN3.105:1.2: Yasmā ca kho, bhikkhave, atthi loke assādo, tasmā sattā loke sārajjanti.
But because there is gratification in the world, sentient beings do love it.
“Love it” has been changed to “be aroused” in the first segment, but not in the second. That may be the case in other instances too.
In SN 22.60 there is even a third segment: “Since they lust after it, they’re caught up in it, and so they become corrupted” (here with “lust after” instead of “love”).
One “meal allocator” has survived in AN 5.272:2.4.
“Sir, what is the cause, what is the reason why for different people in the same kind of business undertaking might fail, while another doesn’t meet expectations, another meets expectations, and another exceeds expectations?”
Not sure if this goes here or in bugfixes
When paging to the next item, in the footer, in the bhikkhuni vibhanga from pli-tv-bi-vb-ss13 to theoretically pli-bi-vb-ss14 it’s not smart enough to jump to the correspoding monks rule pli-tv-bu-vb-ss10
This may happen elsewhere, I just spotted this one.
I am looking at “wear out”, and 15 of 22 results that I get have vipariṇāma. For example
scid: sn35.121:7.1
pli: “Yaṁ panāniccaṁ dukkhaṁ vipariṇāmadhammaṁ, kallaṁ nu taṁ samanupassituṁ:
en: “But if it’s impermanent, suffering, and liable to wear out, is it fit to be regarded thus:
scid: sn35.121:19.1
pli: “Yaṁ panāniccaṁ dukkhaṁ vipariṇāmadhammaṁ, kallaṁ nu taṁ samanupassituṁ:
en: “But if it’s impermanent, suffering, and liable to wear out, is it fit to be regarded thus:
scid: sn35.121:37.1
pli: “Yaṁ panāniccaṁ dukkhaṁ vipariṇāmadhammaṁ, kallaṁ nu taṁ samanupassituṁ
en: “But if it’s impermanent, suffering, and liable to wear out, is it fit to be regarded thus:
scid: sn35.121:49.1
pli: “Yaṁ panāniccaṁ dukkhaṁ vipariṇāmadhammaṁ, kallaṁ nu taṁ samanupassituṁ:
en: “But if it’s impermanent, suffering, and liable to wear out, is it fit to be regarded thus:
In AN 5.191 and AN 5.192, utuni has been translated, somewhat cumbrously, “the fertile half of the month that starts with menstruation”.
In MN 93 and MN 38 it is more elegantly and idiomatically rendered “the fertile part of her menstrual cycle”. This is perhaps a little less precise according to what you write in this essay, but much more readable in my opinion. And does still justice to the matter.
A question to SN 22.123:2.6 (learned mendicant) and 3.5 (non-returner): Here, “properly attends to the five grasping aggregates” has been changed to “regards the five grasping aggregates in this way”. All other stages of practitioner keep “properly attending” to the five aggregates—so what is the difference? It can’t be derived from the abbreviated Pali, so where does it come from?
Star insertions have been left in on the following
22.103
What five? That is, the grasping aggregates of form, feeling, perception, choices, and consciousness. This seems clumsy here.
This is called the side of identity.
22.106
And what is complete understanding? The ending of greed, hate, and delusion. It is from this definition that I prefer “complete “to” full”. Complete has a suggestion of “to the very end” which is slightly different to the connotations of full. This is called complete understanding.
22.107
There are ascetics and brahmins who do truly understand …” Pali text is incorrectly punctuated here, there should be a …
Ha ha, I am only human! It’s a hard couplet, as indeed the whole poem.
The verb here is not actually “plunge” but vihanāmi which means “wipe out, banish, disperse, destroy”. But I think the metaphor is of plunging hot kitchen implements in water. The verbs are similar to those that describe the sizzling sound of hot metal in water (eg. sn7.9:10.3). So it’s hard to construe the apparent metaphor with the exact wording.
Norman avoids the metaphor and just says “I destroy them with a sizzling sound”. Thanissaro has “I cut them with a chop”, which is a nice metaphor, but vihanāmi doesn’t really mean “cut” and Cicciṭi is elsewhere always used for a sizzle. So basically one translates the words, one the idea. Not easy to do both!
How about:
Greed and hate sizzle and hiss
as I squelch them.
The variant title in BJT is paṭipadāvaggo which fits the topic better.
Yes, sorry I mistakenly published some comments by myself and Sabbamitta a couple of days ago. They’re just scratch notes and should not be on the site. I’ve unpublished them and they should disappear in due course.
My aim is eventually to revise these and make proper notes, but currently we only have notes for snp and ud.
SN35.130:1.6: “Idha, gahapati, bhikkhu cakkhunā rūpaṁ disvā ‘manāpaṁ itthetan’ti pajānāti cakkhuviññāṇaṁ sukhavedaniyañca.
“Householder, it’s when a mendicant sees a sight and understands it to be agreeable.
No, it’s correct. The sutta earlier deals with sights, sounds, etc., but the final phrases only mention sights, so the expansion is implied. It’s not very clear tho, let me see if I can phrase it better.