Thanks for noticing, but:
I use the singular they, as Robbie points out. It’s kind of a moot point between “themself” and “themselves”, but my proofreaders preferred “themselves”.
Actually no, that’s one of the inline reference numbers found in Ven Bodhi’s editions.
Burmese font conversion issues
Ahhh, hmm, not sure. We’ve seen these issues before and they should get fixed, but so far haven’t found anyone who knows Burmese and JS well enough to do it.
Pali employs different words (i.e., subhanimittaṃ vs. subhanteva )
Not really, subha is just “beauty” in both cases. Teva is just an indeclinable suffix. In full it is subhaṁ iti eva, where iti signifies “quote marks” and eva adds punch. So it’s just subha vs. subhanimitta, where nimitta is “feature”. Perhaps “aspect” or “dimension” would serve here, too.
Doctrinally, the important part of this passage is that nimitta is used in its normal sutta sense of an aspect or dimension of the something which, when attended to, promotes the arising of similar or related qualities.
As for the definite/indefinite distinction here, I’m not really persuaded. The point here is that the “feature of beauty” is one of a list of other things, not something that itself comprises a list. It is quite true that the subhanimitta includes a variety of different aspects or manifestations, but in the suttas, so far as I know, it is always treated as an uncountable noun. It is like say “goodness”: there may be many good acts, but they are all aspects of goodness.
Should be something like " The Saṅgha of the Realized One’s disciples is said to be the best of all communities and groups
Indeed, thanks.
I think “and” is unnecessary.
Hmm, I think it is fine! But thanks anyway.