Please report any errors or typos!

Thanks, this is fixed. It was a bug in how the IDs were made. We have tested and checked these a variety of ways, yet still this eluded us!

Are you sure about that? These are all excellent, and now fixed.

Both: sarassati is pali, sarasvati is sanskrit. It’s one of those cases where the sanskrit form is probably better known.

No, they are current. Where a translator wishes to indicate that terms have been added, we represent that. I don’t recommend it as a practice, but t is possible to do.

Thanks, fixed. And I also fixed an inconsistency in the subject of the sentences

Well, the compound could be read either way, but if it was “one perceives not-form”, then it would imply one was perceiving the formless realms, which is obviously not what is intended.

Indeed. The segment breaks often fall on natural breaks in the text, but not always. We can’t predict how a translator might handle this, so it needs to be done in the client. @karl_lew, perhaps we could configure the playback to add a gap at the end of the segment only if it ends with punctuation?

Well, this is an interesting one. I notice that I had not been consistent, so I have fixed that now.

The Pali is tidiva, literally the “triple deity”. Ven Bodhi has “triple heaven”. But it is really just a poetic abbreviated form, probably archaic, for the tavatimsa, or “Gods of the Thirty Three”. In fact, the origin of this lies in the very ancient conception of the godhead as a trinity. As time went on, the “three” gods were multiplied to a “super-three”, i.e. “Thirty Three”.

So literally it would be the “Gods of the Three”. But since it is a simple synonym of Tavatimsa, I use “Gods of the Three and Thirty”, lending an archaic and poetic flavor to the translation.

It’s hard!

Actually no, it seems we have a problem in processing the lists correctly. Check

And also



I’m not trying to argue, but how in the world is someone supposed to guess that is the meaning of the gray text? The standard for that, as I know, is square brackets. I agree it’s not beautiful. But it seems either the meaning should be clear or the indication shouldn’t be there at all. Just my $.02

They are not supposed to guess. The tooltip tells you what it means. Does it not work for you?

Oops, i was wrong and you were right; at least, mostly. There is a problem, but it is in the CSS. Chrome and FF handle this case differently. We’ll have to figure out some fix.


Oh, they don’t, actually. I was going to suggest using tool tips.

Name Firefox
Version 64.0.2
Build ID 20190108160530

Windows 10, no adblocker
Doesn’t work on chrome either.

Oh, yes, it looks like you have to have the “textual information” on to see the tooltips, it should be on by default. maybe the styling should only be apparent when activated, too?

I noticed in MN 87, paragraph 4:

Then Queen Mallikā addressed the brahmin Nāḷijaṅgha: “Please, brahmin, go to the Buddha, and in my name bow with your head to his feet. Ask him if he is healthy and well, nimble, strong, and living comfortably. And then say: ‘Sir, did the Buddha made this statement: “Our loved ones are a source of sorrow, lamentation, pain, sadness, and distress”?’

Seems like made is the incorrect verb tense.

Indeed, thanks, fixed now.

On AN 6.63 (penetrative),
“Cetayitvā kammaṃ karoti” is translated as “For after making a choice one acts”, is a bit unusual for “cetana” usually translated as “intention”

When people ask another “What is your favorite color?”, the answer usually involves a choice. But it is a choice without action. Bhante’s translation here clarifies the meaning of intention as “choice leading to action”. Although I’m a fan of consistency, I do like alternate phrasing that clarifies meaning. This allows me to search for English phrasing first then search for Pali text second to get the broader scope of translations.

1 Like


1 Like

Just noticed that instead of feeling, craving has been put in there in DN.15

_"That is, contact through the eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind. When there’s no contact at all, with the cessation of contact, would craving still be found?” _
"cakkhusamphasso sotasamphasso ghānasamphasso jivhāsamphasso kāyasamphasso manosamphasso, sabbaso phasse asati phassanirodhā api nu kho vedanā paññāyethā”ti?

With Metta


Bhante @sujato FYI

There already is a topic to address issues like this:



@Nimal thanks for the error message. I’ve just moved your post to the existing topic for this, :anjal:


Bhante @sujato
This is not an error or typos but I just like to ask the question here.
If moderators think this is worthwhile discussing please create a new post.

Just a matter of interest, why did you translate Naga as a dragon, not as a snake?
To me, the dragon reminds the dinosaur or a Chinese dragon.
I believe here Naga is referring to an Arahant.

Bhante @sujato Just a suggestion.
If I were you I will leave the full translation of the following. That is the crux of this Sutta. In my opinion full translation should be provided for the main pont of any of the suttas.

“In the same way, reverend, purification of ethics is only for the sake of purification of mind. … Purification of knowledge and vision is only for the sake of extinguishment by not grasping.
“Evameva kho, āvuso, sīlavisuddhi yāvadeva cittavisuddhatthā, cittavisuddhi yāvadeva diṭṭhivisuddhatthā, diṭṭhivisuddhi yāvadeva kaṅkhāvitaraṇavisuddhatthā, kaṅkhāvitaraṇavisuddhi yāvadeva maggāmaggañāṇadassanavisuddhatthā, maggāmaggañāṇadassanavisuddhi yāvadeva paṭipadāñāṇadassanavisuddhatthā, paṭipadāñāṇadassanavisuddhi yāvadeva ñāṇadassanavisuddhatthā, ñāṇadassanavisuddhi yāvadeva anupādāparinibbānatthā.
The spiritual life is lived under the Buddha for the sake of extinguishment by not grasping.”
Anupādāparinibbānatthaṃ kho, āvuso, bhagavati brahmacariyaṃ vussatī”ti.

Oops, well spotted, I have fixed it now.

As a general rule, I translated the names of non-human beings to an approximate English equivalent. This is in line with my even more general policy of translating everything unless it was really impossible. Of course, the names of non-human beings in Pali only map very loosely onto those in English; but it is worth bearing in mind that the English meanings also change drastically, as do the Pali. An obvious case is yakkhas, which in later literature typically have a negative sense, a ferocious demon, but in the suttas is most often ambivalent if not positive. Thus using the Indic term can be even more misleading, so I have used “spirit”.

In the case of nāga, we find four main meanings:

  • A large snake, probably king cobra
  • A powerful and dangerous non-human spirit in serpentine form (“dragon”)
  • Elephant
  • In metaphorical sense, a “spiritual giant”.

In MN 23, there is series of interesting metaphors, each of which can be read on multiple levels. On one hand, of course it is to be expected that a snake would live in an ant-hill. However the border between an ordinary snake and a mystical dragon is far from clear-cut. It is common in modern Hinduism to find nagas worshiped in an anthill. Given that the Buddha identified it with the arahant, it seems a better reading than “snake”.

I wrote on this here:



In Majjhima Nikaya 142, Dakkhinavibhanga Sutta, there is a typo at the very end. The sutta ends with 5 short verses. The third one pertains to a gift being purified by neither the giver nor the recepient if both persons are of immoral character. It reads:

When an unethical and untrusting person,
gives an improper gift to ethical persons,
not trusting in the ample fruit of deeds,
I declare that gift is not very fruitful.

But actually, it should read like this:

When an unethical and untrusting person,
gives an improper gift to unethical persons,
not trusting in the ample fruit of deeds,
I declare that gift is not very fruitful.


Thanks, fixed.

1 Like

an3.156-162: one use of “blistering” instead of “scorching” as translation for nijjhāmā