Snp2.5:4.3: Atha kho sūcilomo yakkho bhagavantaṁ gāthāya ajjhabhāsi:
Then Spiky said to the Buddha,
Should be “addressed the Buddha in verse”.
SN10.9:1.3: Atha kho sukkāya bhikkhuniyā abhippasanno yakkho rājagahe rathikāya rathikaṁ siṅghāṭakena siṅghāṭakaṁ upasaṅkamitvā tāyaṁ velāyaṁ imā gāthāyo abhāsi:
Then a native spirit was so devoted to Sukkā that he went street to street and square to square, and on that occasion recited these verses:
Should be “he went from street to street and square to square”.
Punctuation - “At Sāvatthī At that time several mendicants were making a robe for the Buddha, thinking that when his robe was finished and the three months of the rains residence had passed the Buddha would set out wandering. Now at that time the…”
SN11.1:7.2: koci kvaci na jīvati;
who can can live happily without working,
One “can” is enough.
SN11.1:7.1: ‘Sace atthi akammena,
‘If there exists anyone anywhere SN11.1:7.2: koci kvaci na jīvati;
who can can live happily without working, SN11.1:7.3: Nibbānassa hi so maggo,
that surely would be extinguishment’s path! SN11.1:7.4: suvīra tattha gacchāhi;
Go there, Suvīra, SN11.1:7.5: Mañca tattheva pāpayā’ti.
and take me with you!’
SN11.2:7.1: ‘Sace atthi akammena,
‘If there exists anywhere a place SN11.2:7.2: koci kvaci na jīvati;
where you can live happily without working, SN11.2:7.3: Nibbānassa hi so maggo,
that surely would be extinguishment’s path! SN11.2:7.4: susīma tattha gacchāhi;
Susīma, go to that place SN11.2:7.5: Mañca tattheva pāpayā’ti.
and take me with you!’
Except for the names, the verses are identical in Pali, but not in English.
Blurb to SN 11.2:
When Sakka, the Lord of Gods, tries to organize a conterattack against the demons, he is frustrated by his lazy general Susīma. Sakka asks Suvīra how one might get what one wants without effort; but Suvīra apparently believes Sakka can grant any wish he wants. The Buddha emphasizes that if effort is valuable among the gods, how much more so for mendicants.
The general’s name has only been replaced in the first instance; two Suvīras left.
asurapura is translated as “citadel of the demons” (AN 9.39), “demon city” (sn56.41), or “castle of demons” (SN 11.4). And perhaps others I haven’t yet come across.
SN 1.1:1.2 ekaṁ samayaṁ bhagavā sāvatthiyaṁ viharati jetavane anāthapiṇḍikassa ārāme.
At one time the Buddha was staying near Sāvatthī in Jeta’s Grove, Anāthapiṇḍika’s Monastery.
This is so far the only case I saw where in the phrase “Anāthapiṇḍika’s Monastery” the word Monastery starts with a capital.
Oh well, three are more: SN 1.11, SN 1.31, SN 1.32, SN 1.34, SN 1.35, SN 1.36, SN 1.41, Ud 1.10:4.2.
SN11.21:1.2: Atha kho sakko devānamindo yena bhagavā tenupasaṅkami; upasaṅkamitvā bhagavantaṁ abhivādetvā ekamantaṁ aṭṭhāsi.
And then Sakka, lord of gods, went up to the Buddha, bowed, stood to one side, SN11.21:1.3: Ekamantaṁ ṭhito kho sakko devānamindo bhagavantaṁ gāthāya ajjhabhāsi:
and said to him:
Should be: “and addressed him in verse”.
SN11.25:2.1: ‘Mā vo kodho ajjhabhavi,
“Don’t let anger be your master,
That is Bhikkhu Bodhi’s tranlation of MN19. It’s a formatting decision. In the published version the grayed-out words are in brackets:
“Just as in the last month of the rainy season, in the autumn, when the crops thicken, a cowherd would guard his cows by constantly tapping and poking them on this side and that with a stick to check and curb them. Why is that? Because he sees that he could be flogged, imprisoned, fined, or blamed [if he let them stray into the crops]. So too I saw in unwholesome states danger, degradation, and defilement, and in wholesome states the blessing of renunciation, the aspect of cleansing.
I use singular they for “a certain mendicant” and other gender-neutral cases.
One who sees truly like this, with right wisdom …
Oops, sloppy segment resuse.
same problem. I love this passage, so freaky.
again, segment reuse, elsewhere it means “in”. That locative!
again, segment reuse is the culprit: jhayi is translated in thag, which was probably the first, but it is in the next line. After that I omitted by mistake.
I did the math!
Not really, it just means to associate with those who, like the Buddha, enjoy solitude.
I think this is already fixed.
(Partly nicked from Norman!)
I see the point:
having uprooted consciousness, don’t continue in existence.
It’s Nibbana, it means the island from which there is no return, i.e. you don’t get reborn. It’s a common idiom: a “point of no return”.
Hmm, ok. But
Actually, compare ādānasatta in the last verse and even lokasmimupādiyanti. Perhaps we can render “craving for attachments”, and “clinging to attachments”, which makes the verses more coherent.
Dispel all craving for attachments,
above, below, all round, between.
For whatever a person grasps in the world,
Māra pursues them right there.
So let a mindful mendicant who understands
not grasp anything in all the world,
observing that, in clinging to attachments,
these people cling to the domain of death.
Actually, I translated it like this everywhere else. As before, thag was the first text I translated, so sometimes it has older renderings. I have tried to update it, but some things slip through.
Hmm, and dhp126 confirms this sense.
Probably important to capture the future tense here, it clearly means “the end of an arahants life”.
The undefiled who shun this body
like a snake smeared with dung,
having expelled the root of rebirth,
will be fully extinguished.
But the phrase is used in curious ways. In thag5.10 it’s present tense, but it looks as if it should be future. In an5.35 it’s said to a layperson who listens to the teaching, where again it is present tense but must surely have a future sense. I’ll try to make sure it has this sense everywhere.
It does make sense, but let me think about it.
Interestingly specific! But I’m struggling to find independent confirmation of this sense; apart from this passage, where the sense is derived from context, “irrigation canal” is not mentioned in the dictionaries. Skt does give the sense of “river” and “vein”, but both of these are attributed to exicograohers, which is always suspicious.
The basic sense, back to Vedic times, and in the Suttas, is “leader, guide”. This suggests that the term was metaphorically weakened already; the root sense had receded and the secondary meaning rose.
Bhavanetti could then be “that which leads to a new life”.
I dunno, it’s a genuine question either way. It’s used 35 times, without any metaphorical context, so it seems to me that the metaphor is not prominent.
I’ll change to “conduit to rebirth”.
I have redone all passages with this phrase.
change to: “the unattached are freed”
Ha ha, no just a mistake.
Yes, fixed. As for the rest, I agree in principle, just not sure how to translate it. I’ll give it some thought.
saṅkappa is sometimes translated as “thought”, sometimes as “intention”. While this is normal for a word with a variety of meanings, it would be good to keep the same translation in the same context.
In the context of the noble eightfold path it is translated as “thought”, but in the context of diversity (elements, etc. …) it is sometimes “thought” and sometimes “intention”. In SN 14.7 we find even both versions in the same Sutta.
Oh, good catch. Hmm. I agree, it’s likely it doesn’t mean “a Buddhist”. I’ll make it “followers of Gotamaka”.
In such cases i was playing around with using “serene” as a synonym of samādhi. I dunno, in these cases it makes for a better-sounding translation, but then consistency. Arrgh!
I’ll play with it.
traveling along a road in the Kosalan lands
Yes, I agree sharp is good for this reason.
I’ll double-check this. This was one of the first passages I translated.
Hmm, maybe. I think “four quarters” is the more idiomatic phrase for “all around”, whereas “directions” seems more like, “a number of different directions”. In fact, I’m changing all mentions of “four directions” to “four quarters”.
But “six quarters” sounds a bit odd, maybe in that case it should be the six directions. ok.
I’ll go with this one, it sounds better, even if the other is a littler more precise.
Yes, and these two passages are subtly different. I’ve adjusted the translation to more precisely reflect the variant texts.
It’s not easy to not make unclear.
The difference is deliberate. In BB’s version, the monks behave badly and the Buddha is not satisfied. Which seems superfluous; the point, rather, is that he is not upset by what happened. It’s down to a variant in the manuscripts, which must be old, since it is found in the commentary. However acc. to Analayo, the Chinese has the more sensible negative form here, as does the MS edition on which I rely, so I follow that.
We’re in the process of adjusting how these are handled.
Must be a bug in FF, it works fine on Chrome.
No, that’s correct.
Indeed. I’ll put this on the to-do.
Turn off highlighting.
Fun fact, sanantana is related to “senile”.
Change to “eternal truth”.
These verses have a subtle variation in the voice. sn8.8 has carasi “you wander” where thag21.1 has carati “he wanders”. The confusion is probably because most of the verbs in this passage allow a reading as either second or third person. However, the preceding passage is definitely second person, and it seems reasonable to assume that Vangisa is continuing to address the Buddha directly. I’ll render both passages in second person.
However, the phrase “see him!” must be in third person. Here I imagine Vangisa is turning to the monks to exhort them. The aorist three lines down (akkhāsi “explained”) can be either second or third person, but I assume that, since this is a new verse, Vangisa has turned back to address the Buddha.
This is caused by missing translation of heading, I think I have updated all these cases now.
It’s odd that the Pali is different in each case. But anyway, I think this is a mistake: it is pp of vibhajati, and in the context of teachings it should have the normal sense of “analyzed”. BB has “resorted to” which I can’t explain. Norman has “things shared out”, without comment.
The commentaries evidently take it in this sense, explaining as “among the things (or teaching) that are blameable or blameless, I have attained the best of them, i.e. Nibbana”.
This seems reasonable, since it always occurs in the context of arahantship.
Of the well-explained teachings,
I arrived at the best.
Thanks, I have made a ticket for this and a few similar cases.
As Mike notes, there never was a Mills translation, as he did not complete the whole work. It’s just an earlier version of my translation. The same goes for snp3.6. The existence of two translations by the same author is confusing our system, so I’ll delete the old ones.
Such are the problems if you attempt even such a trivial change in the text. I’ll fix it.
No, I’m just taking my sweet time.
A significant difference!
I’ve adjusted it a bit to fix this.
Oops, fixed, thanks.
Actually, it’s still idiomatic English, but I’ll change it anyway.
There are a couple of other cases, too, thanks for noticing.
But three would be more fun.
‘If there exists anywhere a place
where one can live happily without working,
Evidently a lazy translator.
use this throughout
evidently not heartfelt enough.
It seems Brahmali is translating with a capital, so why not do the same?
always use thought in this context
Ok, I think I’ve done all these now.
Thanks so much to everyone who has made a suggestion! They are all welcome and so, so helpful.