Hi @Raftafarian … “aver” is a word that is not used very often but basically means “affirm” or words to that effect. See: AVER | meaning, definition in Cambridge English Dictionary
2 Likes
I’d never guessed that one! 
Minor typo in Iti 107, Sujato translation:
“Mendicants, brahmins and houselholders…”
Hopefully this is the correct venue for typos!
SN22.89:7.3: yametaṁ, āvuso khemaka, asmīti vadesi, kimetaṁ asmīti vadesi?
when you say ‘I am’, what is it that you’re talking about?
As this is already inside a nested quote, the quote marks have to be double here. Likewise in segment 7.9
When you say ‘I am’, what is it that you’re talking about?”
and here, the sentence closes with both a single and double quote.
Alas, these quote marks! 
SN22.101:2.4: ‘Abhāvitattā’ tissa vacanīyaṁ.
It’s because they’re undeveloped.
Both here and in AN 7.71, tissa vacanīyaṁ is not translated.
The phrase ponobbhavikā nandīrāgasahagatā tatratatrābhinandinī is sometimes translated “leads to future lives, mixed up with relishing and greed, taking pleasure in various different realms”, sometimes it is “leads to future rebirth, mixed up with relishing and greed, looking for enjoyment in various different realms”.
In SN 22.104 and 105, where the Pali is abbreviated, the English says: “leads to future lives, mixed up with relishing and greed, looking for enjoyment anywhere it can”.
Not sure if this is an issue, but when I was reading AN 7.52 (SuttaCentral). My first impression on the ellipsis (…) Is that the result of giving with intention of following their father or father’s father is the same as giving with intention to get it’s result on next life. Because ellipsis is usually used to repeat what has been said before. My intution think this shouldn’t be.
Only after consulting with Thanissaro’s translation that I can confirm there’s different result of giving with different intention. So I think current usage of ellipsis mislead reader in that there’s no difference of giving with different intention.
SN22.123:3.5: arahattaphalaṁ sacchikareyyā”ti.
“It’s possible that a mendicant non-returner who properly attends to the five grasping aggregates will realize the fruit of perfection.” …
No ellipses required here, nothing has been abbreviated.
Under the category of trivial variations: bhattuddesako is in one place a meal allocator and another a meal assigner.
1 Like
Elsewhere, “allocator” is used for gāhāpaka, like “lodgings allocator” in AN 5.273–285. Also, “meal-allocator” has a hyphen and “lodgings allocator” has not, which is why one is found by searching for “allocator”, and the other one not.
1 Like
https://suttacentral.net/an6.55/en/sujato
When you were still a layman, weren’t you a good harp player?” kusalo tvaṁ pubbe agāriyabhūto vīṇāya tantissare”ti?
https://suttacentral.net/thag13.1/en/sujato
When my energy was over-exerted, Accāraddhamhi vīriyamhi, the supreme Teacher in the world satthā loke anuttaro; created the simile of the lute for me. Vīṇopamaṁ karitvā me, The Seer taught the Dhamma, dhammaṁ desesi cakkhumā; and when I heard what he said, Tassāhaṁ vacanaṁ sutvā, I happily did his bidding. vihāsiṁ sāsane rato.
Personally, I think it’s better just to call it a vina, since it’s still an instrument played today, and it’s called a vina. It’s true that “lute” can be a general term for a stringed instrument, but the vina is quite unique, and unlike any western lute.
In any case, it’s not a harp by any stretch of the imagination. Unless I’m totally off base on this, which I could be.
1 Like
Wikipedia begs to differ. It seems the ancient vina is quite unlike today’s veena, so calling it a “harp” seems to be not only more intelligible to the average reader, but more accurate as well:
2 Likes
Well, at least I got something right!
3 Likes
Bhante @Snowbird’s new Sutta diff tool reveals some subtle differences between MN 10 and DN 22, like for example:
The phrase abhūtaṁ atacchaṁ anatthasaṁhitaṁ is translated “untrue, false, and pointless” in DN 29, and “untrue, false, and harmful” in MN 139 and MN 58.
The index of similes gives SN35.205 for the lute simile, and I can’t see a lute simile in that sutta. Am I missing something?
1 Like
Yes, unfortunately the indexes as they are have a number of errors. Well I should say no small number of errors. For the simile index they have already been all listed together.
Also, you may consider that what is called “lute” in one translation is perhaps called “harp” in another translation. But surely in SN 35 there is not a single correct link in this index.
The simile you are looking for is found in SN 35.246.
1 Like
The wealth of faith, ethical conduct, conscience, prudence, learning, generosity, and wisdom.
https://suttacentral.net/an7.5/en/sujato
The wealth of faith, ethics, learning, generosity, and wisdom.
https://suttacentral.net/an5.47/en/sujato
Usually it’s just “ethics” I think.
1 Like
In SN 23.3, the phrase upayupādānā cetaso adhiṭṭhānābhinivesānusayā is translated “any attraction, grasping, mental fixation, insistence, and underlying tendencies” in segment 1.5; in segment 1.11 (where the Pali is abbreviated) it’s “any becoming involved, grasping, mental fixation, insistence, and underlying tendencies”.
SN 23.12 translates māradhamma as “Māra-like nature”, but the blurb says:
Rādha asks the Buddha about being subject to Māra, and the Buddha explains in terms of the five aggregates.
The Vagga Sutta SN 23.23–33 is called SN 23.23 in English.
SN24.1:1.4: ‘na vātā vāyanti, na najjo sandanti, na gabbhiniyo vijāyanti, na candimasūriyā udenti vā apenti vā esikaṭṭhāyiṭṭhitā’”ti?
‘Winds don’t blow; rivers don’t flow; pregnant women don’t give birth; the moon and stars neither rise nor set, but stand firm like a pillar.’”
Between single and double closing quote there should still be a question mark.
SN24.1:4.11: “Yampidaṁ diṭṭhaṁ sutaṁ mutaṁ viññātaṁ pattaṁ pariyesitaṁ anuvicaritaṁ manasā tampi niccaṁ vā aniccaṁ vā”ti?
“That which is seen, heard, thought, known, sought, and explored by the mind: is that permanent or impermanent?”
“Attained” is lacking in the list.
I’m not sure if anyone else has this issue. I keep seeing null when I try to look for parallels. This issue is only observable on my Firefox browser. It works just fine on Google Chrome.
1 Like
Regarding the following from the second pārājika rule for bhikkhus:
On one occasion a monk, out of compassion, released a deer trapped in a snare. … released a deer trapped in a snare, intending to steal it before the owners found it. … out of compassion, released fish trapped in a fish-net … released fish trapped in a fish-net, intending to steal them before the owners found them. He became anxious … “You have committed an offense entailing expulsion.”
Though it does faithfully adhere to the form of the Pali, the manner of abridging also gives the misleading impression that a bhikkhu who releases a trapped deer or fish out of compassion would thereby commit a defeating offence, when in fact the act would be a non-offence. Wouldn’t it be better to use the expansive and disambiguating method found in the Thai, Portuguese and I.B. Horner renderings?
On one occasion a monk, feeling compassion, released a deer trapped in a snare. … “There’s no offense for one who is motivated by compassion.” he released a deer trapped in a snare, intending to steal it before the owners saw it. … “You have committed an offense entailing expulsion.” … feeling compassion, released fish trapped in a fish-net … “There’s no offense for one who is motivated by compassion.” … he released fish trapped in a fish-net, intending to steal them before the owners saw it. He became remorseful … “You have committed an offense entailing expulsion.”
2 Likes
The view rūpī attā hoti arogo paraṁ maraṇā is translated “The self is physical and well after death” in DN 1 and DN 29, whereas in SN 24.37, etc., it is “The self has form and is well after death”.
Etaṁmamādisutta is translated “This is Mine, Etc.” in SN 24.20–35, and “This is Not Mine, Etc.” in SN 24.46–69 and in SN 24.72–95.
SN24.70:1.3: ‘adukkhamasukhī attā hoti arogo paraṁ maraṇā’”ti?
“‘The self is neither happy nor suffering, and is well after death’?”
Remove opening double quote mark, it’s already in the previous sentence.
In SN 24 in many of the Suttas about the self being happy, suffering, etc., “after death” has dropped in translation. I mean, it’s all very abbreviated, so maybe it’s on purpose.
The phrase karoto na karīyati pāpaṁ is sometimes translated “the one who acts does nothing wrong”, sometimes “nothing bad is done by the doer” (and likewise for karoto karīyati pāpaṁ).