SuttaCentral
There appears to be a typo in Māluṅkyaputta Sutta (SN 35.95).
Bhikkhu Sujato’s “Māluṅkyaputta” is correct but
Bhikkhu Bodhi’s was “Maluṅkyaputta”
The ‘a’ is supposed to be macron ā.
Bhikkhu Bodhi’s translation by Wisdom Publications rendered the proper ā.
AN9.35:7.3: So ākāsānañcāyatanaṁ anabhihiṁsamāno sabbaso rūpasaññānaṁ samatikkamā …pe… ākāsānañcāyatanaṁ upasampajja viharati.
Without charging at the dimension of infinite space, with the fading away of rapture, they enter and remain in the dimension of infinite space.
Instead of “fading away of rapture” it should be "ending of perceptions of impingement, not focusing on perceptions of diversity, aware that “space is infinite”, or an abbreviated form of that.
AN9.36:3.2: evamevaṁ kho, bhikkhave, bhikkhu vivicceva kāmehi …pe… paṭhamaṁ jhānaṁ upasampajja viharati.
In the same way a noble disciple, quite secluded from sensual pleasures, enters and remains in the first absorption.
Should be “mendicant” instead of “noble disciple”.
No, it’s taken countless aeons of samsara to accumulate sufficient ignorance to make such an obvious blunder.
But it’s easy to explain: AN 4.100 is to Potaliya the Wanderer, and I copied the title over. Anyway, I’ve fixed this, and just to let everyone know, I am watching this thread and will get to fixing everything in due course, so keep posting!
It’s chapter 33, volume 29. Looks correct to me.
https://suttacentral.net/ud3.2/en/sujato
Yes, reverend,” Nanda replied. He went to the Buddha, bowed, and sat down to one side. The Buddha said to him:
The Buddha said to him:
“Is it really true, Nanda …
“The Buddha said to him” has been duplicated.
vipulena mahaggatena appamāṇena is usualy translated “abundant, expansive, limitless”—except for in AN9.11:9.2 where it is “abundant, limitless, measureless”. In all other segments of that same Suttas we find the usual phrase.
The three terms assāda, ādīnava, and nissaraṇa are usually translated “gratification, drawback, escape”. In AN 10.26 however, they are “beginning, drawback, escape” (occurring in several segments). Why?
The same two segments occur twice in DN 24:
DN24:1.12.2: Tassa acelo kaḷāramaṭṭako pañhaṁ puṭṭho na sampāyāsi.
But when it stumped him,
DN24:1.12.3: Asampāyanto kopañca dosañca appaccayañca pātvākāsi.
he displayed annoyance, hate, and bitterness.
and
DN24:1.13.6: Tassa te acelo kaḷāramaṭṭako pañhaṁ puṭṭho na sampāyāsi.
But when it stumped you,
DN24:1.13.7: Asampāyanto kopañca dosañca appaccayañca pātvākāsi.
you displayed annoyance, hate, and bitterness.
I don’t quite understand why in the second case it is “you” and not “him”. This doesn’t fit in the context.
AN10.28:3.5: Kajaṅgalikā bhikkhunī etadavoca:
The nun Kajaṅgalikā said this:
AN10.28:4.1: “‘Eko pañho eko uddeso ekaṁ veyyākaraṇan’ti, iti kho panetaṁ vuttaṁ bhagavatā.
‘One thing: question, passage for recitation, and answer.’ That’s what the Buddha said,
Venerable Kajaṅgalikā’s talk starts with a quote, but it still needs the opening double quote mark at the beginning. I.e., it needs a double and a single quote mark.
AN10.52:2.1: “No ce, āvuso, bhikkhu paracittapariyāyakusalo hoti, atha ‘sacittapariyāyakusalo bhavissāmī’ti—
“Mendicants, if a mendicant isn’t skilled in the ways of another’s mind, then they should train themselves: ‘I will be skilled in the ways of my own mind.’
Should be “reverends” instead of “mendicants”.
In SN46.54 SuttaCentral there seems to be a glitch:
15.1And how is the heart’s release by equanimity developed? What is its destination, apex, fruit, and end?
15.2and equanimity, which rely on seclusion, fading away, and cessation, and ripen as letting go …
“ Silly man, who on earth have you ever known me to teach in that way?”
“There are three gentlemen who love themselves staying here.”
Can you say what the typo is? I’m personally not a big fan of that translation, but it is not a typo as far as I know. What were your thoughts?
I was wondering if it should be “who themselves love staying there” as the other way is weird, but I could be wrong.
This is the Pali:
Santettha tayo kulaputtā attakāmarūpā viharanti.
This is Bhante Bodhi’s translation:
“Do not enter this park, recluse. There are three clansmen here seeking their own good. Do not disturb them.”
As I said, I’m not a fan of the translation you reported, but I think it is intentional. But Bhante Sujato will eventually come through and comment. Actually discussing alternatives to translations should probably go in a new thread.
use:
shake, tremble, quake, or get nervous
use
desire to be reborn
Thanks, fixed.
Use this rendering, it’s more idiomatic.
Use this.
thx, fixed.
In such contexts, use “cosmos”.
use this form.
Thanks, fixed.
Thanks Karl, I will review these usages.
yes, the tense is incorrect, also, the segmenting in inconsistent, I’ll fix it.
shave, it’s more specific.
I’ve made a ticket for this.
Thanks, I’ve fixed all these.
use this always
Yes, it’s on the 2-do list.
I’ve made a ticket for this.
Ugh, changing to “suffering and distress” throughout, but “pain and misery” is so much better. I might change them all to this!
fixed.
I’m just the translator, take it up with the big guy!
drop the hyphen, generally speaking only use hyphen when it’s essential.
How badly do I want to translate this as “doctor”? Very, very badly.
Thanks, we’ll look into it.
Not at all, we appreciate it!
Fixed
quite right, I’ve fixed it!
I can confirm, that is the reading found in our source the Mahasangiti. As a rule we don’t correct the source text.
However in this case I don’t think it’s incorrect as such; -āna is a recognized form of the dative/genitive plural, best known in the phrase buddhāna sāsanaṁ.
I have updated it, but haven’t pushed through corrections to the site for some time, pending my Sutta Nipata translation. It’ll be there soon.
Lol, yes, stop partying!
well spotted!
yes, actually it should be adjusted.
That seems significant, does it not?
I’ve revised my usage throughout and in such contexts, always use “qualities” for dhamma.
My shame at mixing this up is somewhat mollified by the fact that the Suttas do so too. In AN 3.50 the (bad) mendicant has both aṅga and dhamma. Ven Bodhi has “qualities” in both cases, either by oversight or variant reading I guess.
It’s a tricky one! I’ve done my best to catch them all.
I assume it is a causative form—like the preceding and following pairs—which BB also does (“one who learns and makes others learn”).
I notice, though, that DoP doesn’t list it as causative, and nor does the commentary. Looks like you’re right, it should be “memorize and remember”.
It’s an odd case: it only occurs in the aorist, hence adhibhāsati is purely a theoretical term. It’s not listed in the headwords in Cone’s DoP or the Digital Pali Dictionary, which just lists the (unattested) ajjhabhāsati. So I’m inclined to leave this one as-is.
where it is used for the Vinayapitaka, use “monastic law” to keep consistency with Brahmali.
I’m making this change throughout. Also make sure that vinayadhara is “expert in monastic law”.
In such contexts, use “fondness” for piya, “warmth” for pema.
fixed
fixed
I usually omit the repeated vocative, as they quickly grow wearying when read, rather than recited.
I’ve changed this to “ceases”.
Oops, thanks!
Ahh yes, thanks.
Oops, thanks.
Yes, the Pali sets up a pattern, and you can tell what belongs to what by the use of the pronouns. But it doesn’t seem to translate in English, so I’ll make it more explicit.
Thanks everyone for your contributions! I’m running out of steam today, I’ll finish these off tomorrow. 
Yes, the Dhammapadas in general need some love, and this would be a good addition.
The titles don’t really belong in the text: they are back-ported from the commentaries. They’re not in the text in the PTS or BKT editions. Presumably they were added in the Myanmar tradition at some point, probably either the Fifth or Sixth Councils.
thx, fixed.
Well-spotted! I have fixed it now.
It should be Gayā.
Right, thanks.
Ahh, TBH I can’t remember if it was a deliberate change. But it seems ok, no?
I think it’s justified. Normally this idiom begins a longer string, and the repetition clogs the syntax; in this case, though, the extra length balances the flow.
fixed!
fixed!
fixed! (But I really want to translate as “principles” here! What it means is that the principles of the four noble truths, dependent origination, etc., tho not exactly “impermanent” are still “not self”).
Nope, just a mistake.
It’s a good point, tagging @brahmali on this.
thx
Waiyin, I’m not sure exactly what to do here. Perhaps Charles has an idea?
I’m wondering whether it would be useful to open a dedicated thread here or on Github for this?
fixed, thanks.
See Bodhi’s NDB, note 2000 for discussion of the variant here. The reading “beginning” (ādi-*) is found in some Pali texts and is supported by the Chinese. It seems an example of lectio difficilior potior.
You’re quite right, I misunderstood the context.
right, thanks.
right, done.
Indeed, I’ll fix it.
I’m not seeing a problem?
Pali is attakāma, this is correct.
This seems to be translating the commentary’s attano hitaṁ. His more recent translation in NDB is “desiring their own good”. But here the commentary is giving a moralizing explanation, not a re-rendering: “to love oneself is to practice for one’s own benefit”. Fair enough, but it’s not what the text says.
The Pali has no problem with the idea of “loving oneself”. See Ud 5.1, where we have both piya and kāma for attā.
Modern translations frequently err, I believe, in creating a text that is more emotionally and personally distant than the original. We use, for example, “one” to fill the subject that is frequently left implied in Pali verbs. But “one feels” is formal and distancing, whereas vedeti is not.
So I am always looking for ways to make the text more immediate, more emotional, more connecting. Lots of modern Buddhists are really uncomfortable with the whole notion of “love”, so I use it whenever I can. 
I’m not sure either. Are the English translations on SuttaCentral not matching Dhammajoti’s translation?
There’s nothing wrong with SC’s version of T212. It’s just that you broke it up into chapters ( 品) rather than volumes (卷). CBETA does the opposite because … well, they wanted to do that, I guess. The volumes are more of a curiosity in modern times unless a person wants to copy the texts into scrolls and recreate the way the texts were stored in the olden days.
@cdpatton Some differences have been found through proof-reading Dh(C)9 to Dh(C)20 and Dh(C)34 (Ven. Dhammajoti’s translation). (About half, will get the other half done eventually). WY
Dh(C)11.3a is/should not be the same as Dh(C)11.4a: 獨行遠逝， [Mind] travels alone, going far off,
[Parallel to Dh(P)36]
意微難見， Mind is subtle, difficult to discern;
隨欲而行， It moves according with craving.
慧常自護， The wise always protects his own mind;
能守即安。 When it is guarded, there will be peace.
Dh(C)12.10a 1st word propercase = As
[Parallel to Dh(P)52]
如可意華， As a flower pleasing to the mind,
Dh(C)15.5 and Dh(C)15.6 combined
[Parallel to [Dh(P)94]
He whose senses are controlled, according with calm
Like horses well tamed,
Who has abandoned conceit and the conditioning;
Is respected by the gods.
[Parallel to [Dh(P)95]
Without resentment, like the earth;
Immovable, like a mountain;
The true men are taintless,
And have ended the worldly cycle of rebirths.
Dh(C)14.4a square brackets for different word
[Parallel to Dh(P)78]
常避無義， Always avoid unprofitable [company].
不親愚人， Do not be close to the fools.
思從賢友， Think of following the good friends.
押附上士。 Associate with the noble ones.
Dh(C)26.17d misspelled word vracing
[Parallel to Dh(P)251]
火莫熱於婬， There is no fire hotter than lust.
捷莫疾於怒， There is no speed greater than anger.
網莫密於癡， There is no net denser than delusion.
愛流駛乎河。 The craving stream is more rapid than a river.
Dh(C)31.3 misspelled word escel
[Parallel to Dh(P)322]
雖為常調， Even those as properly tamed,
如彼新馳， As the thoroughbred horses of Sindh,
亦最善象， And the best elephants;
不如自調。 Cannot excel a man who has tamed himself.
Dh(C)31.5 misspelled word chianed
[Parallel to Dh(P)324]
如象名財守， Like an elephant named Dhanapālaka,
猛害難禁制， Who is ferocious and hard to restrain;
繫絆不與食， Though chained and not given food
而猶暴逸象。 It still remains wild as a rutted elephant.
Dh(C)35.15 is missing (Yet to proof-read all of Dh(C)35 though)
[Parallel to Dh(P)397]
絕諸可欲， He who giving up all objects of craving,
不婬其志， Does not vex his mind with lust.
委棄欲數， Who renounces all that pertains to craving;
是謂梵志； Is indeed a brāhmaṇa.
pli-tv-kd20 Contents missed out the first part:
Still seems fine to me. In fact I prefer it with a marker. Is there a reason you don’t like it?
Nota bene: I’m closing this thread and opening another one, so if anyone wants to continue, let’s do it over there.
