My question was: Is “worth learning and memorizing” not good enough? We have that example already. And it returns one Sutta more than “will want to listen”. This extra Sutta is:
AN2.47:1.5
It is an assembly where, when discourses spoken by the Realized One—deep, profound, transcendent, dealing with emptiness—are being recited the mendicants do not want to listen. They don’t pay attention or apply their minds to understand them, nor do they think those teachings are worth learning and memorizing.
AN2.47:1.6
But when discourses composed by poets—poetry, with fancy words and phrases, composed by outsiders or spoken by disciples—are being recited the mendicants do want to listen. They pay attention and apply their minds to understand them, and they think those teachings are worth learning and memorizing. But when they’ve learned those teachings they don’t question or examine each other, saying:
AN2.47:1.7
‘Why does it say this? What does that mean?’
AN2.47:1.8
So they don’t clarify what is unclear, or reveal what is obscure, or dispel doubt regarding the many doubtful matters.
The thing about “worth learning and memorizing” is that it is about proper attention and unskillful assemblies.
The danger brought out in AN20.7 is different. The specific danger of AN20.7 is that if we insist on embellishing the suttas with our own interpretations, no matter how truthful, we will destroy the Dhamma by grasping at our own proliferations. I’ve always had this nagging feeling that I could not express. And AN20.7 expresses that nagging feeling beautifully.
It’s SN20.7, not AN20.7. And it is just as well returned by “worth learning and memorizing”. The Sutta I just quoted is the one that is returned on top of what is returned by “will want to listen”.
The trouble I see is not with the search results (yay, three!), but with the wording of the example itself. Perhaps “worth learning and memorizing” is not a good example because the “the mendicants do want to listen”, but they listen to the wrong thing. So I would replace “worth learning and memorizing” with “fancy words”. The Buddha spoke simply and some people think fancy words are worth learning and memorizing.
Now we also have a German translation of SN 20.7, the drum peg Sutta (to come
to Dhammaregen soon). And there is also an interesting comment on it (as we talked of comments yesterday, @karl_lew). In any case for translators, it’s very helpful.
Yes. Drums arouse energy. As in cittakkharā, which is actually not present in Bhante’s translation. If we wish to include the sense of that term it would alter the translation from “fancy/schoen” to “stirring/rührende”. This is the stronger translation. We go to plays and movies to listen to “stirring words”. Indeed, it is different enough from fancy that we might consider it further, especially since it ties in with drums. Drums are used precisely because they stir up energy in times of war. Drums rouse energy. Drums stir feelings. So one might also use “rousing words”. That would be “mitreißende Worte”.
Yes, I too was thinking like this first. But the lookup tool is sometimes wrong in how it breaks down a compound. The double “k” should make you suspicious. There is no reason to double the “k”, if it’s just citta + khara. So in such cases I start searching and playing around until I find something reasonable. Sometimes I don’t, but in this case I did.
Working on examples for my latest translations, next to making corrections for German ones and adding what is already there in English, I am still adding a new one:
term for sensual pleasures | Ausdruck für Sinnenfreuden (4 results)
Got it. Thanks!