an4.85:2.3 (also similar in an4.85:4.3):
They don’t get to have food, drink, clothes, and vehicles; garlands, fragrance, and makeup; or bed, house, and lighting.
Pretty strange phrasing; could do with an “a” or two?
1 Like
May I ask why Pali mahākoṭṭhika is consistently transcribed in English as Mahākoṭṭhita? I guess it’s a variant?
Is it the case these letters are similar in writing in either Burmese or Sinhala scripts?
I checked the Sinhala and Burmese and to my untrained eyes K and T looked alike!
ක vs ත
က vs တ
P.S.: I produced the above by rendering Ka and Ta from IAST into the aforementioned scripts using the cool tool the topic below is about (thanks @virtualvinodh!) :
2 Likes
staging.suttacentral.net/dn33/en/sujato:
An what is the way of developing immersion further that leads to the ending of defilements?
Should be And.
Depends on who’s reading? I believe it is Mahakotthita and not Mahakotthika, which doesn’t sound right.
1 Like
DN 32 King Kuvera mis-spelt in one place
The Great King Kureva, dear sir,
has a capital named Visāṇā,
which is why the great king
is called ‘Vessavaṇa’.
as King Kureva
2 Likes
https://suttacentral.net/mn84/en/sujato
And then King Avantiputta said: “Give away all the different foods that have been prepared there.”
Where’d that food come from? Or maybe we should be asking where it went so we can eat it. 
Anyway, I think it is a cut and paste error
Indeed, from ja 464-510 were assigned to the incorrect volume, I have fixed this.
fixed
Yes, the translation is elided here due to repetition.
fixed.
I don’t know, this feels like a normal idiom to me.
Fixed.
Lol. fixed.
Fixed.
Fixed
Yikes, fixed.
I’ve fixed this case. There are pluses and minuses, but on the whole I think in a few cases using markup for lists is justified. The basic principle is that the list structure is not in the text, so, like paragraphs, verse markup, and so on, it is in the markup.
fixed.
Agreed, fixed.
Fixed.
It’s a bit odd, but not a mistake. It’s because the paragraph breaks are in different places.
Fixed.
fixed
Ahh, no i think the translation is correct as is.
Fixed
Indeed, fixed.
Actually, just delete “Then they said:” the rest is abbreviated.
amended to “strong, guarded by the teaching” (they’re in the same case so no relation between the terms is implied.)
Fixed.
fixed.
I dunno, “bed and board” is stock English, I think it’s fine.
Yes, I think Mahākoṭṭhita is probably the Sinhalese spelling. These were mostly used by the PTS in their editions, and have become familiar in the English-speaking world.
Fixed.
My dreams, perhaps? Fixed!
Thanks once more to everyone for their corrections!
8 Likes
DN 24 About Patikaputta.
There are 4 paragraphs after
"That is what the Buddha said. Satisfied, the wanderer Bhaggavagotta was happy with what the Buddha said. "
Could you check these last four paragraphs are in the correct place.
Thanks
1 Like
I checked MN 1-50. My knowledge of English is imperfect, so I apologize in advance for any overcorrections. Just some friendly suggestions .
Suggestions
MN 25 , SC 5, 7 & 16
then we won’t became negligent
“become”
Minor suggestions
MN 39, SC 8
If the faculty of mind was left unrestrained.
Subjunctive mood, perhaps “were” fits better
MN 36, SC 27
Chick peas
chickpeas
MN 36, SC 27
Eighty year old
eighty-year-old
MN 35, SC 3
Sixty year old
sixty-year-old
MN 26, SC 3
Near by
Nearby
MN 20, SC 3
If the corpse of a snake or a dog or a human was hung around their neck.
Subjunctive mood, perhaps “were” fits better
Non-American English
MN 38, SC 92
Ploughs
Plows
MN 6, SC 14
Fulfil
fulfill
MN 5, SC 11-13
Offence
offense.
I’m not sure about these
MN 7, SC 12
Is the river called Sarassati or Sarasvati?
1 Like
It appears this sutta has what I am guessing are old span tags: SuttaCentral
in a deep pit close to water <span class="add" title="">thinking</span>:
2 Likes
AN 4.192
#SC 3.4: That’s why I said that you can get know a person’s ethics by living with them.
… get to know
#SC 5.5: That’s why I said that you can get know a person’s purity by dealing with them.
… get to know
#SC 7.5: That’s why I said that you can know a person’s resilience in times of trouble.
… get to know
2 Likes
DN 16, the first of the eight abhibhāyatana, the translation on SuttaCentral reads:
Not perceiving form internally, they see visions externally, limited, both pretty and ugly.
Should be:
Perceiving form internally, they see visions externally, limited, both pretty and ugly.
4 Likes
@sujato
Strangely this matter was raised in Dhamma Wheel as well.
I also think Ven Sujato made mistake here:
Ānanda, there are these eight dimensions of mastery. What eight? Not perceiving form internally, they see visions externally, limited, both pretty and ugly. Mastering them, they perceive: ‘I know and see.’ This is the first dimension of mastery.
It should be “perceiving form internally”:
aṭṭha kho imāni, ānanda, abhibhāyatanāni. katamāni aṭṭha ? ajjhattaṃ rūpasaññī eko bahiddhā rūpāni passati parittāni suvaṇṇadubbaṇṇāni. ‘tāni abhibhuyya jānāmi passāmī’ti evaṃsaññī hoti. idaṃ paṭhamaṃ abhibhāyatanaṃ.
In case “not perceiving” it would be “arūpasaññī”.
https://dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=33466&sid=8ad606442fbe37e0914571258c4196d2
1 Like
Is this related to the following in DN33?
Perceiving form internally, someone sees visions externally, limitless, both pretty and ugly. Mastering them, they perceive: ‘I know and see.’
Ajjhattaṃ rūpasaññī eko bahiddhā rūpāni passati appamāṇāni suvaṇṇadubbaṇṇāni, ‘tāni abhibhuyya jānāmi passāmī’ti—
I have seen it DN16. (see my above post in Dhamma Wheel)
1 Like
Thank you. I was confused.
I didn’t realize the “not” went with rūpasaññī as you mention. In English Bhante Sujato has put the “not” with the “not perceiving”. But in Pali, it is literally “perceiving internally not-form”. 
This is a subtle difference, because “not perceiving” could be unmindful unawareness and “perceiving not-form internally” is awareness that there is no form internally. It took me several weeks to puzzle this out as my mind got stuck on “not perceiving”. Eventually I figured out that the meaning is “internal awareness of not-form”. Bhante’s translation is simpler and clear, it’s just my picky head getting confused.
2 Likes
MN 19 #SC 12.1
Suppose it’s the last month of summer, when all the crops have been gathered into the neighborhood of a village, and a cowherd must take care of the cattle. While at the root of a tree or in the open he need only be mindful that
This is just an example, and similar instances occur in many suttas.
The segment ends with “that”, a conjunction that introduces a sub-clause which is given in the following segment:
the cattle are there.
From the Pali it is understandable to beak the segment at this point, as the sub-clause here takes the form of a direct speech (with Quotation marks). But in the English this isn’t the case.
When reading the text this didn’t appear to me so much as a problem, but now when listening through SC-Voice it feels quite disturbing to have the conjunction in one segment, and then having to wait before hearing where it leads to (especially when listening bilingual Pali—English which is what I mostly do). The flow would be more natural if the “that” would be moved to the following segment.
Another instance being for example in AN 8.53:
You should definitely bear in mind that these things are
ekaṃsena, gotami, dhāreyyāsi:
not the teaching, not the training, and not the Teacher’s instructions.
‘neso dhammo, neso vinayo, netaṃ satthusāsanan’ti.
“are” should be moved to the next segment.
Just something for you to consider…
1 Like
For consistency in searching, I would favor just one of those throughout the translations even though they are all valid.