No worries at all, it was a suggestion the mods received… but was acknowledged to be borderline… I just thought it was worth mentioning as a good reminder For ease of seeing the actual error and typos
It’s like when the rain pours down on a mountain top, and the water flows downhill to fill the hollows, crevices, and creeks. AN 10.61.
I think “and” is unnecessary.
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.
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.
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.
Hmm, I think it is fine! But thanks anyway.
MN7:2.2: tamenaṃ rajako yasmiṃ yasmiṃ raṅgajāte upasaṃhareyya—yadi nīlakāya yadi pītakāya yadi lohitakāya yadi mañjiṭṭhakāya durattavaṇṇamevassa aparisuddhavaṇṇamevassa.
MN7:2.2: No matter what dye the dyer applied—whether yellow or red or magenta—it would look poorly dyed and impure in color.
The blue color is omitted in translation (again in mn7:2.7).
Should be “donor” instead of “noble disciple”.
AN10.60:7.4: cakkhurogo sotarogo ghānarogo jivhārogo kāyarogo sīsarogo kaṇṇarogo mukharogo dantarogo oṭṭharogo kāso sāso pināso ḍāho jaro kucchirogo mucchā pakkhandikā sūlā visūcikā kuṭṭhaṃ gaṇḍo kilāso soso apamāro daddu kaṇḍu kacchu nakhasā vitacchikā lohitaṃ pittaṃ madhumeho aṃsā piḷakā bhagandalā pittasamuṭṭhānā ābādhā semhasamuṭṭhānā ābādhā vātasamuṭṭhānā ābādhā sannipātikā ābādhā utupariṇāmajā ābādhā visamaparihārajā ābādhā opakkamikā ābādhā kammavipākajā ābādhā sītaṃ uṇhaṃ jighacchā pipāsā uccāro passāvo’ti.
AN10.60:7.4: Diseases of the eye, inner ear, nose, tongue, body, head, outer ear, mouth, teeth, and lips. Cough, asthma, catarrh, inflammation, fever, stomach ache, fainting, dysentery, gastric pain, cholera, leprosy, boils, eczema, tuberculosis, epilepsy, herpes, itch, scabs, smallpox, scabies, hemorrhage, diabetes, piles, pimples, and ulcers. Afflictions stemming from disorders of bile, phlegm, wind, or their conjunction. Afflictions caused by change in weather, by not taking care of yourself, by overexertion, or as the result of past deeds. Cold, heat, hunger, thirst, defecation, and urination.’
There seems to be no English translation for pittaṁ which comes between lohitaṁ (hemorrhage) and madhumeho (diabetes).
Awesome list, btw, which shows that the human body hasn’t changed very much over the last 2500 years.
4 posts were split to a new topic: Translating 'disturbance of wind
Umm, that seems to be an issue with the readings. Most times where this passage appears we see lohitapitta, for which I follow Ven Bodhi in rendering as “hemorrhage”. TBH, I don’t really know what it means, and most of these are educated guesses.
Yes, it’s a good point. I’m not really sure, but certainly that would be a reasonable choice. Perhaps it deserves more close research.
In MN 35 there is a passage where I don’t understand the translation:
Grounded on form they make good and bad choices.
rūpattāyaṃ purisapuggalo rūpe patiṭṭhāya puññaṃ vā apuññaṃ vā pasavati
I don’t see a word that corresponds with ‘choices’ - doesn’t it stand in conflict with how you otherwise translate sankhara?
Bodhi seems to follow the text more closely when he translates
based upon material form he produces merit or demerit.
Yes, Ven Bodhi’s is more literal, but it’s not what I would consider idiomatic or particularly comprehensible.
Error in AN 10.99:
Suppose there was a large lake, and along comes a bull elephant with a height of seven or eight cubits. He’d think, ‘Why don’t I plunge into this lake and play around while washing my ears and back? When I’ve bathed and emerged from the water, I’ll come out and go wherever I want.’ And that’s just what he does. Why is that? Because his large life-form finds a footing in the depths.
The part in bold should read “…and drunk, I’ll emerge from the water…”, as in this passage:
Then along comes a rabbit or a cat. They’d think, ‘What difference is there between me and a bull elephant? Why don’t I plunge into this lake and play around while washing my ears and back? When I’ve bathed and drunk, I’ll emerge from the water and go wherever I want.’ They jump into the lake rashly, without thinking. You can expect that they’ll sink down or float away. Why is that? Because their little life-form finds no footing in the depths. If someone should say this, ‘Though I don’t have immersion, I’m going to frequent remote lodgings in the wilderness and the forest.’ You can expect that they’ll sink down or float away.
nhatvā ca pivitvā ca paccuttaritvā yena kāmaṃ pakkameyyan’ti.
I don’t want to nag, but it seems that nobody has looked into this post from three weeks ago:
Indeed, thanks. Sorry for missing this earlier, I try to catch all of them, but obviously I overlooked this one. Getting a timely reminder is very helpful!
Also, is “them” the right pronoun for gentleman?
Friends and colleagues served by a gentleman in these five ways show compassion to them …
Ascetics and brahmins served by a gentleman in these five ways show compassion to them …
Hmm, good point, I’ll change to “him” in this case. Update: fixed! Or at least, I hope so. It’s a tricky one to find.
Then several mendicants robed up in the morning and, taking their bowls and robes, entered Sāvatthī for alms. Then it occurred to him, “It’s too early to wander for alms in Sāvatthī. Why don’t we go to the monastery of the wanderers who follow other paths?”
Unfortunately, the website for the Petavatthu translation by Ven Gnananada has changed. it is in the (i) dot on his Petavatthu translations. For example here SuttaCentral
I notice that in blurbs there is often still terminology that has been changed in the actual suttas, like for example “convergence” that has been modified to “immersion” in the suttas.
SN34.10 is incompletely translated. It is 1/4 complete.
Bhikkhus , to one encloived with the thirty-two marks of a Superman…
“Encloived” is a rather lovely word. Perhaps we could use it to mean “enclosed with ivy” or something. Still, I think the intended word is “endowed”.