In MN148, there is a typo in Bhikkhu Bodhi’s translation:
Hebecomes disenchanted with the body
Thag14.1:1.3: Nābhijānāmi saṅkappaṁ,
I’m not aware of any intention
versus
Thag1.48:1.3: Nābhijānāmi saṅkappaṁ,
I’ve not been aware of any thought
Intention or thought? Perhaps thought is better in this context.
https://suttacentral.net/define/asaññasattā?lang=en
The AN hyperlink links to AN9.23 instead of AN9.24
That’s because the links are based on the PTS citation. The disadvantage of that citation is that it is page accurate and not sutta accurate.
The hyperlinks are there as a convenience but they can’t be better than the system they are taken from.
1 Like
“Songs” has generally been changed into “mixed prose & verse”, but in AN 4.102 some songs seem to have survived.
Similarly with “sky-god”: When deva is in a context with rain, it is usually translated “sky-god”, but in Thag 2.35 there’s still simply “sky”.
Thag2.41:2.1: Asaṅkheyyesu kappesu,
Through countless eons
Thag2.41:2.2: sakkāyādhigatā ahū;
they obtained individual identities.
Thag2.41:2.3: Tesamayaṁ pacchimako,
This is their last,
Thag2.41:2.4: carimoyaṁ samussayo;
their very final body
I am wondering if “identity” is here the best translation for sakkāya. According to the dictionary it can also mean a “body”. As the next line continues with the body, would it not fit better to say “body” here?
Accuta has been translated “imperishable” in Thag 1.1 and SN 22.95, and “unchanging” in Thag 2.46.
The sentence ubhatodaṇḍakena cepi, bhikkhave, kakacena corā ocarakā aṅgamaṅgāni okanteyyuṁ is translated “even if low-down bandits were to sever you limb from limb with a two-handled saw” in MN 21, but in MN 28 the “two-handled saw” is lacking in translation.
MN28:9.5: Vuttaṁ kho panetaṁ bhagavatā kakacūpamovāde:
But the Buddha has said in the Simile of the Saw:
This same sentence is translated in segment 24.3 of the same Sutta:
But the Buddha has said in The Advice on the Simile of the Saw
MN146:11.2: Yaṁ yadeva tattha antarā vilimaṁsaṁ antarā nhāru antarā bandhanaṁ taṁ tadeva tiṇhena govikantanena sañchindeyya saṅkanteyya sampakanteyya samparikanteyya.
they’d cut, carve, sever, and slice through the connecting tendons, sinews, and ligaments,
“A sharp meat cleaver” is lacking in translation. Later on, this sharp meat cleaver is said to be a term for noble wisdom, so it should be mentioned here.
MN43:16.2: “Avijjānīvaraṇānaṁ kho, āvuso, sattānaṁ taṇhāsaṁyojanānaṁ tatratatrābhinandanā—
“It’s because of sentient beings—shrouded by ignorance and fettered by craving—taking pleasure wherever it lands.
Should be “taking pleasure wherever they land”—beings are plural.
MN62:12.5: kaṇṇacchiddaṁ nāsacchiddaṁ mukhadvāraṁ, yena ca asitapītakhāyitasāyitaṁ ajjhoharati, yattha ca asitapītakhāyitasāyitaṁ santiṭṭhati, yena ca asitapītakhāyitasāyitaṁ adhobhāgaṁ nikkhamati, yaṁ vā panaññampi kiñci ajjhattaṁ paccattaṁ ākāsaṁ ākāsagataṁ, aghaṁ aghagataṁ, vivaraṁ vivaragataṁ, asamphuṭṭhaṁ, maṁsalohitehi upādinnaṁ—
the ear canals, nostrils, and mouth; and the space for swallowing what is eaten and drunk, the space where it stays, and the space for excreting it from the nether regions.
The same passage occurs in MN 140. In both cases, there is no translation for the last part, yaṁ vā panaññampi kiñci ajjhattaṁ paccattaṁ ākāsaṁ ākāsagataṁ, aghaṁ aghagataṁ, vivaraṁ vivaragataṁ, asamphuṭṭhaṁ, maṁsalohitehi upādinnaṁ.
In MN 62, vāyodhātu is translated “air element”, but further down in segments 16.2-5, vāyo is translated “wind” (as is in the parallel passage in AN 9.11).
Thag3.5:3.1: Dabbaṁ kusaṁ poṭakilaṁ,
With my chest I’ll thrust aside
Thag3.5:3.2: usīraṁ muñjapabbajaṁ;
the grasses, vines, and creepers,
Thag3.5:3.3: Urasā panudissāmi,
and foster seclusion.
Thag3.5:3.4: vivekamanubrūhayan”ti.
Four lines have become three in translation?
She then departed without informing of the owners.
The “of” looks to be a typo.
First paragraph of Ajahn @Brahmali 's translation of Bhikkhuni’s Pācittiya 15
Cittakali is translated “demon mind” (without hyphen) in Thag 2.47:2.1, and “demon-mind” (with hyphen) in Thag 5.9:2.3.
Ajahn @Brahmali: In pli-tv-bu-vb-pj1:2.1.12 we read
And so the he said to Ānanda
It looks like the “the” is too much.
1 Like
In DN 26 there is a comment/annotation which says
which should have ensure.
1 Like
The translation for pakkhandati has been changed from “eager” to “secure”. Can you please explain how you come to the meaning of “secure” for pakkhandati? Thanks!
Discrepancy amongst Summary, Header, and Content for
https://suttacentral.net/lzh-mu-bu-pm/lzh/taisho?lang=en&reference=none&highlight=false
contains in the section header:
108 sekhiya rules
諸大德是眾學法。半月半月戒經中說。
and then in the content:
sekhiya 102
不得上過人樹。除有難緣。應當學。
諸大德。我已說眾多學法。今問。諸大德。是中清淨不(如是三說)諸大德。是中清淨默然故。我今如是持。
The summary says: ‘The Bhikkhu-pātimokkha, “the monastic code for monks,” contains the core rules of monastic life in the form of a long list without any explanatory material. There are 248 such rules for the monks, grouped according to the type of offense incurred for breaking the rule, with the exception of the aniyatas (“the undetermined”), and the adhikaraṇasamathadhamma (“the principles for resolving legal issues”), which are principles to be applied rather than rules in the strict sense.’
4 Pj + 13 Ss + 2 Ay + 30 Np + 90 Pc + 4 Pd + X Sd + 7 As = (150 + X) “rules”
So X = 98 or 102 or 108 ?
1 Like