Make a rainbow fall at our feet 🌈 tell us about our mistakes, typos, and other oversights

MN4:32.3: ‘Khīṇā jāti, vusitaṁ brahmacariyaṁ, kataṁ karaṇīyaṁ, nāparaṁ itthattāyā’ti abbhaññāsiṁ.
They understand: ‘Rebirth is ended, the spiritual journey has been completed, what had to be done has been done, there is no return to any state of existence.’”

Should be “I understood”.

MN 4:35.4, comment:

Jānussoṇi goes forth so often in the suttas that it is almost a genre unto itself (mn27, sn12:47, an2.17:3.1, an3:55, an3:59, an4:184, an6:52, an7:47, an10:119, an10:167, an10:177). Such narrative accounts of conversion or enlightenment at the end of discourses are not very reliable, as they are not the Buddha’s words but were added by editors at some point.

Jānussoṇi is not going forth, he is taking refuge, here as on all the other occasions.

My main translation aim has been to render the Pali into idiomatic English, with the meaning standing out as clearly as possible. If we follow the Pali structure too closely, the English tends to sound awkward, which is often a hindrance to comprehension.


The terms rattiyā paṭhamaṁ, etc., are sometimes translated “first, middle, and last watch of the night”, in other cases it’s “evening, middle of the night, and last part of the night”.

Makkha is sometimes translated “disdain”, sometimes “offensiveness”.

Atimānī is sometimes “arrogant”, sometimes “vain”.

Unnaḷa is sometimes “insolent”, sometimes “arrogant”.

For uddhata I find sometimes “restless”, sometimes “conceited”.

Parikkamana is translated “bypass” in AN 10.175 and “way around” in MN 8.

Hmm … I am a bit stuck with this phrase in MN 8:

yattha cetā diṭṭhiyo uppajjanti yattha ca anusenti yattha ca samudācaranti taṁ ‘netaṁ mama, nesohamasmi, na me so attā’ti—evametaṁ yathābhūtaṁ sammappaññā passato evametāsaṁ diṭṭhīnaṁ pahānaṁ hoti, evametāsaṁ diṭṭhīnaṁ paṭinissaggo hoti. (segment 3.6)

Your translation is

A mendicant gives up and lets go of these views by truly seeing with right wisdom where they arise, where they settle in, and where they operate as: ‘This is not mine, I am not this, this is not my self.’

while Bhikkhu Bodhi has

“Cunda, as to those various views that arise in the world associated either with doctrines of a self or with doctrines about the world: if the object in relation to which those views arise, which they underlie, and which they are exercised upon is seen as it actually is with proper wisdom thus: ‘This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self,’ then the abandoning and relinquishing of those views comes about.

The German translator Ven. Mettiko seems to analyse the Pali the way Bhikkhu Bodhi does, that is, the statement ‘This is not mine, I am not this, this is not my self’ does not describe how these views operate, but it is the way in which all three “places” should be seen: the “place” where the vies arise, where they settle in, and where they operate.

This meaning makes a lot of sense to me, but I am not 100% sure about the analysis of the Pali.

In case this makes sense to you too, it would perhaps be something like

A mendicant gives up and lets go of these views by truly seeing with right wisdom as: ‘This is not mine, I am not this, this is not my self’ that where they arise, that where they settle in, and that where they operate.


Hmm … perhaps that’s what you meant all along, and I misunderstood! I understood the following:

A mendicant gives up and lets go of these views by truly seeing with right wisdom where they arise,
by truly seeing with right wisdom where they settle in,
and by truly seeing with right wisdom where they operate as: ‘This is not mine, I am not this, this is not my self.’

Is this only me as a second language speaker? Or is the wording prone to misunderstanding?

1 Like

Perhaps the descriptions of Iti 32 and Iti 33 are a mistake? Details: Iti 32 and 33 - "in this lifetime"

1 Like

AN 7.54‘A Realized One still exists after death’: this is just about craving. … it’s just about perception … it’s an conceiving …"
should be “a conceiving” ?

Saṅkilesadhamma is translated “whose nature is defiled” in AN 4.255 and “liable to become corrupted” in MN 26.

MN26:20.3: Atha kho, bhikkhave, brahmā sahampati—seyyathāpi nāma balavā puriso samiñjitaṁ vā bāhaṁ pasāreyya, pasāritaṁ vā bāhaṁ samiñjeyya; evameva—brahmaloke antarahito mama purato pāturahosi.
Then, as easily as a strong person would extend or contract their arm, he vanished from the Brahmā realm and reappeared in front of the Buddha.

Should be “in front of me”—the Buddha is himself relating the story.

Same in the next segment.

MN26:27.2: ‘mā, bhikkhave, tathāgataṁ nāmena ca āvusovādena ca samudācaratha.
‘Mendicants, don’t address me by name and as ‘reverend’.

“Reverend” should be in double quotes; it’s inside the other quote, which in turn is inside the main story. :laughing:

1 Like

At Iti 97, in the verses,

Who does nothing wrong
by body, speech or mind,
is said to be one good morals,
a conscientious mendicant.

Insert ‘of’ before “good morals”?


MN29:4.25: Appamatto samāno samādhisampadaṁ ārādheti.
Being diligent, they achieve immersion.

Further down samādhisampadā is translated “accomplishment in immersion”, which I think is what it means.

The term alamettāvatā katamettāvatā is translated:

  • “just this much is enough” in MN 39
  • “at this point it’s enough; at this point our work is done” in DN 10
  • “that is sufficient, enough has been done” (or, as a question, “is this sufficient, has enough been done?”) in MN 129 and DN 17

MN51:5.11: Imesaṁ, pessa, catunnaṁ puggalānaṁ katamo te puggalo cittaṁ ārādhetī”ti?
Which one of these four people do you like the sound of?”

Is citta here translated as “sound”? I have never heard of this meaning …

As it appears, all other translators, English and German, refer citta to Pessa, not to the four persons: “Which one of the four people pleases your mind?”

1 Like

There is a problem with a link in the introduction article:

The link goes to and in the SC code it has the title “Introduction to the Early Buddhist Texts in Sanskritised Prākrit”.

I believe that the link should be to this page:

Can someone confirm?

And, Bhante @Sujato, will there be some slick way in the new Bilara for multiple languages to be updated when links break? I guess the solution is just to manually search/replace on a local version and then submit a pr?

1 Like

I’ve made the change for DE. (Even if I need to change it again later because it turns out the actual target is something else, but this is certainly better than a “404” which is what the old link leads to.)

Thanks for finding!

1 Like

AN 7.70
I think
"It’s quite possible for a mendicant who respects the Teacher to respect teaching. … "
should be “respect the teaching”


Missing phrase at Iti 22.

As a result, for seven eons of the cosmos contracting and expanding I didn’t return to this world again.
Satta vassāni mettacittaṁ bhāvetvā satta saṁvaṭṭavivaṭṭakappe nayimaṁ lokaṁ punarāgamāsiṁ.

As a result of … :pray:

(The parallel passage at AN 7.62 has ‘I developed a mind of love for seven years’ before ‘as a result.’)

Also, there is this phrase found at e.g. AN 11.12

When you’re grounded on these five things, go on to develop six further things.
Imesu kho tvaṁ, mahānāma, pañcasu dhammesu patiṭṭhāya cha dhamme uttari bhāveyyāsi.

This same formula repeats in several suttas, but at AN 11.13 for example there is a variation that is translated as if it were the same as previous suttas:

When you’re grounded on these six things, go on to develop five further things.
Imesu kho te, nandiya, chasu dhammesu patiṭṭhāya pañcasu dhammesu ajjhattaṁ sati upaṭṭhāpetabbā.

This should be along the lines of “(go on to) establish mindfulness of five more things internally.” Later in the sutta it is translated accordingly:

In this way you should establish mindfulness internally based on the Realized One.
Iti kho te, nandiya, tathāgataṁ ārabbha ajjhattaṁ sati upaṭṭhāpetabbā.

I think this happens in several places, so it would probably need checked with Bilara. :slight_smile: Unless there’s a reason the variations in the text have been normalized


The word ñātisālohitā is sometimes translated “relatives and (or) family members”, sometimes “relatives and (or) kin”.

MN82:41.10: ‘yagghe, mahārāja, jāneyyāsi, ahaṁ āgacchāmi puratthimāya disāya?
‘Please sir, you should know this. I come from the east.

“Great king” instead of “sir”.

In AN 4.178 sakkāyanirodho is translated “to stop identifying”. I think everywhere else "sakkāya* has become “substantial reality”.

na maññati is usually translated “don’t conceive”, except for in MN 113, where it is “does not identify”.

MN113:25.1: Puna caparaṁ, bhikkhave, asappuriso sabbaso rūpasaññānaṁ samatikkamā paṭighasaññānaṁ atthaṅgamā nānattasaññānaṁ amanasikārā ‘ananto ākāso’ti ākāsānañcāyatanaṁ upasampajja viharati.
Furthermore, take someone who, going totally beyond perceptions of form, with the ending of perceptions of impingement, not focusing on perceptions of diversity, aware that ‘space is infinite’, enters and remains in the dimension of infinite space …

“An untrue person” instead of “someone”.

MN122:6.4: Tatrānanda, tathāgato vivekaninneneva cittena vivekapoṇena vivekapabbhārena vūpakaṭṭhena nekkhammābhiratena byantībhūtena sabbaso āsavaṭṭhānīyehi dhammehi aññadatthu uyyojanikapaṭisaṁyuttaṁyeva kathaṁ kattā hoti.
In that case, with a mind slanting, sloping, and inclining to seclusion, withdrawn, and loving renunciation, he invariably gives each of them a talk emphasizing the topic of dismissal.

This sentence has a parallel in AN 8.30:16.3, but there the passage byantībhūtena sabbaso āsavaṭṭhānīyehi dhammehi is not included, and this passage hasn’t been translated here in MN 122. Something like “having ended all things connected with defilements” should be added here.

MN122:15.1: Yattha bhikkhunā abhikkhaṇaṁ sakaṁ cittaṁ paccavekkhitabbaṁ:
So you should regularly check your own mind:

Should be “a mendicant” instead of “you”.

The term vacasā paricitā is translated “reinforced them by recitation” in AN 4.191 and “reciting them” in MN 122, leaving out the “reinforced”.

MN122:22.3: Tassa tathāvūpakaṭṭhassa viharato anvāvattanti brāhmaṇagahapatikā negamā ceva jānapadā ca.
While meditating withdrawn, they’re visited by a stream of brahmins and householders of the city and country.

Here the term brāhmaṇagahapatikā negamā ceva jānapadā ca is taken as if there are two groups of people, the brahmins and the householders, and both of them are from the city and the country.

Elsewhere (AN 5.30, AN 6.42, AN 8.86) there are three groups of people: brahmins, householders, and people from town and country.

In the same way, when the Dhamma is being taught for the cessation of substantialist view, someone whose mind isn’t secure, confident, settled, and decided
Evameva kho, ānanda, yesaṁ kesañci sakkāyanirodhāya dhamme desiyamāne cittaṁ na pakkhandati nappasīdati na santiṭṭhati na vimuccati
MN 64:8.7

Should not be ‘substantialist view’ but rather ‘the cessation of substantial reality’ according to the current translation of ‘sakkāya.’

As an aside, because it is relevant here, I currently don’t think ‘substantial reality’ fits how sakkāya is used in the suttas, the above being a common example of its use in several suttas. The practice is not to make “substantial reality” cease. It’s talking about the cessation of personal/individual existence, basically. And ‘sakkāya diṭṭhi’ is a view about personal existence, specifically views of self.

Jainism may use ‘astikāya’ for substantialist categories, but that doesn’t mean ‘sakkāya’ means the same, just as ‘dhamma’ does not mean ‘motion’ and ‘puggala’ does not mean ‘matter’ — two important identical doctrinal terms in Buddhism and Jainism with different meanings. Of course the meanings/uses are related, but from my reading of the passages, it goes too far to make them too similar.


1 Like

From which Sutta is this please?

Found it! It’s only in MN 64:8.7.

1 Like

The term attabhāva has generally been changed from “life-form” to “incarnation”, but a few life-forms have still survived: in AN 8.19, AN 8.20, Ud 5.5, AN 5.100, AN 10.99, and SN 56.36.

MN122:25.4: Idhānanda, satthā sāvakānaṁ dhammaṁ deseti anukampako hitesī anukampaṁ upādāya:
It’s when the Teacher teaches the Dhamma out of kindness and compassion:

I think the teacher teaches the Dhamma to the students.

The same again in segment 26.2.

In The Fish King’s Conduct it is written: “Satnding in the truth” instead of ‘Standing in the truth’

1 Like

The term uddesa is sometimes translated “passage for recitation”, sometimes “recitation passage”; in MN 133 there are even both versions.

The term samādhinimitta is usually translated “foundation of immersion”; only in MN 122 it is “basis of immersion”.

I just noticed this:

Should “transactions” be “translations”? If it’s wrong, that means we have to change 19 interface translations :sob: [EDIT: Actually, this was only internationalized recently. Still several to fix, though.]

I’d also say that “site UI” is much, much to geeky for normal users. Maybe we could change to “site interface”. That wouldn’t change the meaning.

1 Like

In the “unpublished” branch the interface file has “translation”:

"interface:chooseYourLanguageDescription": "Where available, view transactions and site UI in selected language.",

whereas “published” has “transaction”. From what I have in German, the change to “translation” must be new.

For German, it does actually look quite different (and the text that I see here differs from what I see in Bilara):

Screenshot from 2024-01-19 14-08-43

"interface:chooseYourLanguage": "Wählen Sie Ihre Sprache ",
"interface:chooseYourLanguageDescription": "Zeigt Vorgänge und Benutzeroberfläche in gewählter Sprache, wo vorhanden. ",

And when hovering my mouse over this text, I see the popup text “Return to main menu” (not visible in the screenshot)—which has no translation.


1 Like