Do you know if changes made at the LC are automatically pushed out to libraries that use the system?
I think Bhante Sujato has already reported it. Do you think it is helpful to have multiple people report, or would that just annoy the people who read the reports? If the publishers have submitted it as a translation, do you think that the librarians at the LC will be able to make a dermination?
I’m also concerned with the actual LC catalog number. It’s current number, BQ1452.E5 puts it on the shelf right next to actual translations.
Bhante @sujato gave a nice talk about this issue last night, which showed some stark contrasts between the Therigatha and Matty’s poems. There should be a recording soon…
What I actually found most interesting was how the talk helped me better see the depth of the originals.
Bhante talked about how he was not good at marketing. It occurred to me that it would actually be nice for some low-key marketing if he would do a talk along the lines of the talks in the Itivuttaka course from a few months ago. Not worrying about “The First Fee Women” poems, just pointing out how powerful the Therigatha poems are, and how they subvert views about traditional roles of women, such as Bhaddā Kāpilānī’s verses SuttaCentral, which first praise her husband, Kassapa, then point out that she is just as accomplished. And Mahāpajāpati Gotamī, SuttaCentral, who previously was a mother, a son, a father, a brother, and a grandmother, but is now liberated.
It would be great if the readings were given by a Bhikkhuni, supplemented by the sort of exposition we had last night. Something we could point potentially interested people to, such as my insight group friends, who are aware of suttas but really don’t read them much, and perhaps even the people who are including Matty’s poems on their reading lists for feminist studies courses…
Having something positive and interesting out there about the original verses may be, in the end, be more effective than just criticising the marketing of “The First Free Women” book (though that is still important).
I do apologise for suggesting work for people. I just felt so inspired after last night’s talk…
I reached out to a US library colleague for advice on this - “A lot of the work happens through the cooperative cataloging program but the LC will probably be willing to look into it”.
Library systems importing OCLC bibliographic data will see the most recent version of the record.
Here’s a recent talk on Matty Weingast’s book by Bhante Sujato, where he outlines key issues with the text and the problematic way it has been promoted. He compares several of Weingast’s poems with his own translations, examining what is missing, what has been added and explains why this matters if we want to faithfully maintain our sacred Buddhist texts.
Reading through this thread this morning, and seeing the positiveAmazon blurbs from western “Buddhists” that also derive their livings from teaching Buddhisms to affluent westerners, this is just another example of how the teachings of the Buddha are distorted in order to create a brand and financial platform for the authors and teachers, so that they can further monetize their involvement in consumer Buddhisms. It’s just irksome that so many that know better feel free to repackage the Dhamma in order to make money. This trend in western Buddhisms commercializes something that is by its nature anti-commercial, and further dumbs down the pool of resources that are available to suffering people.
Thankful to our friend Bodhipaksa for posting a review on Amazon, calling this Weingast book a “fraud,” because that is really what it is. A fraud by its nature is designed to deceive, and to knowingly do so for personal or financial gain. There’s just way too much of this already in western Buddhisms, and it’s sad to see that this ugly stick touched one of the Dhamma’s most beautiful and important works
This thread is being reopened at the request of @Charlotteannun. Please focus your comments on the material in her OP essay, the EBTs and other textual matters. As you know there are PM threads where those who wish to strategise further are welcome.
Just found another review that tackles some of the same issues that Ayya Suddhamma does:
From the article conclusion:
If you have made it this far into this post, you may be asking why I’m writing about poetry on a fiction blog. I’m writing about poetry because, in this case, perhaps it should be categorized and marketed as fiction, or at the very least, poetry in response to readings of the Therīgāthā, but definitely not Buddhist. Fiction as we know it is Buddhist when it represents and inscribes Buddhist principles into the literature of any language. More often than not, these principles are represented intertextually. That is, there is a narrative thread of Buddhist sacred text or traditional story that drives the fictional plot. And fiction itself, at its best, opens a third space for grappling with life, suffering, intersecting cultures and religious adaptations. There is truth in fiction, but it is not real. Thus we approach reading fiction differently than the way we approach reading a sacred text. We suspend our disbelief for fiction so as to allow the imagery and symbolism to inform our imaginations and glean insight from and through the experiences of characters unlike ourselves. We approach sacred text like the Therīgāthā very differently. We mine sacred text for truth. This is why undertaking translation requires an exhausting goal of veracity to the original, so that, as Grass said, the language and reader are transformed, yet (and I dare say because) the meaning has not changed.
How should a reader approach this text? My first answer is, really, not at all. But if I had to assign this in a Buddhist literature class, I would ask students to read with a view to give examples of demythologization derived from decontextualization, detraditionalization, and desacralization. I would ask them to compare the different forms of patriarchy revealed in good translations of the poems of the elder nuns versus Weingast’s work and expect to hear of contemporary entitlement, sexism, and erasure. And I would ask them if, as An Tran suggests in his Lit Hub article, the Shambhala tome is a sign of the decline of the dharma.
And I would ask them if, as An Tran suggests in his Lit Hub article, the Shambhala tome is a sign of the decline of the dharma.
I can only say that the response to FFW from the Sutta Central community/sangha, and from thoughtful others, like An Tran and Kimberly Beek that have posted, suggests that the Dhamma is being protected, and that this proper and healthy advocacy on behalf of the Therīgāthā is a very strong signal of the health and future integrity of the Dhamma.
