Please report any errors or typos!


Some more:

SuttaCentral link “SC 2” points to “SC 1”

SuttaCentral “(Identical with 12:44.).” Link does not work.

Same here: SuttaCentral

SuttaCentral does not mention the three kinds of immersion after the colon. Davids does. Same for next para.

“(Suffering) If the latter statement (2) cannot” should be “(iii) If the latter statement (2) cannot” … This occurs several times, e.g. SuttaCentral

SuttaCentral "Theravādin: —Does the person transmigrate from this world, etc.? Here the em-dash is unnecessary.

SuttaCentral “Here a certain person is a destroyer of Life, taker of things not given, misbehaving in sensual desires, bar,” should be “Here a certain person is a destroyer of Life, taker of things not given, misbehaving in sensual desires, liar,”

SuttaCentral : “where he ought t o :” should be “where he ought to:”




MN 93 in SC 18.13 has “rahmin” instead of “brahmin”



Blurb for SN 10.8:

“When Anāthapiṇḍika heard that a Buddha had arisen in the world, he rose first thing in the morning to go a visit him. But a mysterious darkness caused him to hesitate, so a spirit repeatedly encouraged him to step forward. Finally he reached the Buddha, and asked if he had slept well.”

The bold passage sounds strange to me. I’m not a native speaker, but is this correct English? :thinking:

Another question concerning the ‘mysterious darkness’:

During the night he got up three times thinking it was morning.
Rattiyā sudaṃ tikkhattuṃ vuṭṭhāsi pabhātanti maññamāno.

I thought he may have thought it is morning because it looked to him as if it was already light. So maybe the mysterious thing was rather the light, not the darkness—which is to be expected at nighttime.

And when he started acting according to this light—which as I understand must have been rather in his mind than outside—at some point the light subsided, and the night became apparent again:

But as he was leaving the city, light vanished and darkness appeared to him. He felt fear, terror, and goosebumps, and wanted to turn back.
Atha kho anāthapiṇḍikassa gahapatissa nagaramhā nikkhamantassa āloko antaradhāyi, andhakāro pāturahosi, bhayaṃ chambhitattaṃ lomahaṃso udapādi, tatova puna nivattitukāmo ahosi.

He “wanted to turn back”—but I’m wondering if he did actually turn back. Above it says that he got up three times during the night, so he must have returned to his bed in between, doesn’t he? The spirit Sivaka has to encourage him three times, and then he manages to go to the cool grove; and he arrives there right at the crack of dawn—i. e. only now is it that the outer darkness is vanishing…

Just some thoughts, and my Pali is by far not good enough to judge if there might be something to it. But it would give the story more consistency.



I read that as “go and visit him”. A typo.

I myself have often hesitated out of self-doubt (i.e., mysterious darkness) to venture forth and ask a question. My friends often needed to poke me to ask.

Before an important meeting I used to do this. It’s quite maddening actually, this not wanting to miss an appointment. This too was self-doubt. Normally I can just tell myself what time to wake up.

So for me, that mysterious darkness of self-doubt is the obsessive fear of doing the wrong thing. I am a total failure at being a perfectionist.


MN 104 has
“And how there the covering over with grass?”

I guess it sould be

“And how is there the covering over with grass?”


DN 2, SC 95.2

With clairvoyance that is purified and superhuman, they see sentient beings passing away and being reborn—inferior and superior, beautiful and ugly, in a good place or a bad place. They understood how sentient beings are reborn according to their deeds:

and later in the same segment

They understand how sentient beings are reborn according to their deeds.

I think it should be present tense in both cases.


MN 70 seems to be missing some text. The translation reads,

Since those mendicants were unable to convince the mendicants who were followers of Assaji and Punabbasuka, they approached the Buddha, bowed, sat down to one side, and told him what had happened. Then they said:

So the Buddha said to a certain monk: ‘Please, monk, in my name tell the mendicants who follow Assaji and Punabbasuka that the teacher summons them.’"

Presumably “Then they said” should be followed by what they said, and not by what the Buddha did in response.


Gus, the MN70 reference is in this case unique, however, it is helpful to also provide a MN70 link. And I agree that it appears text segments 5.2-12 lack english translations. The Pali is present.



Furthermore, the Realized One recollects many kinds of past lives.

Puna caparaṃ, subhūti, bhikkhu anekavihitaṃ pubbenivāsaṃ anussarati,


SN11.4: With Vepacitti

“The strength of folly
is really just weakness, they say.
But no-one can challenge a person
who’s strong because guarded by the teaching.” - Should it because they are guarded by the teaching


Some more:

And I’ve now lost even the degree of clarity I had from previous discussion with Master Gotama.” should be “I had from a previous discussion” or “I had from previous discussions”

“seeingavisible(object)” needs more space.

SuttaCentral closing quotation mark is missing.

“the Jive skandhas.” should bd “the five skandhas.”

“4ih” should be “4th”

“etc… . then” should be “etc. … then” Occurs several times on this page. Also “etc., etc”, which should be “etc., etc.”

single qoutes are used instead of double quotes.

" cf. §165the" should be " cf. §165 the"

"intellection —even " should be "intellection—even "

“of raving” should be “of craving”

“(nandi),delighting in” should be “delighting in, (nandī)”.

“(dukkhappabhavo),production of pain” should be “production of pain, (dukkhappabhavo)”. In this list most of the Pali diacritics are missing, with the exception of “ṃ”

closing quotes are of different types

“aiid” should be “and”

“theappropriate” should be “the appropriate”

“Hfe” should be “life”


Or “who’s strongly guarded by the teaching”


Thanks Manfred. I will try to look at these when I get the chance, but just so you know, this thread is primarily for my translations. Older translations are typically sourced from OCR and are full of errors. Like, thousands of them. The poor quality of older translations was one of the reasons I began my project. Picking out occasional errors in the older translations is honestly kind of a waste of time. If they are to be improved, it needs a concerted and systematic effort. But frankly it’s just not worth it, as the work itself is not very useful.


non uniform translation of the phrase
“Maññamāno kho, bhikkhu, baddho mārassa, amaññamāno mutto pāpimato”

SN 35.248
When you have conceit, you’re bound by Māra. Not conceiving, you’re free from the Wicked One.
SN 22.64
When you identify, mendicant, you’re bound by Māra. Not identifying, you’re free from the Wicked One.


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?


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!


က vs


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!) :


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.