Please report any errors or typos!


MN 80 With Vekhanasa
7th paragraph "Such is the splendor of the self that is sound after death.”
Should this read “found after death”




Ven @sujato translation.

Take a mendicant who, going totally beyond the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception, enters and remains in the cessation of perception and feeling. That goes beyond it.
Idhudāyi, bhikkhu sabbaso nevasaññānāsaññāyatanaṃ samatikkamma saññāvedayitanirodhaṃ upasampajja viharati, ayaṃ tassa samatikkamo;
So, Udāyī, I even recommend giving up the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception.
iti kho ahaṃ, udāyi, nevasaññānāsaññāyatanassapi pahānaṃ vadāmi.

I.B.Horner translation.

As to this, Udāyin, a monk, by wholly transcending the plane of neither-perception-nor-non-perception, enters on and abides in the stopping of perception and feeling. This is its transcending. It is for this that I, Udāyin, speak even of the getting rid of the plane of neither-perception-nor non-perception.


Honer translation make more sense.


Perhaps this is my poor English Bhante @sujato
Could you explain the meaning of the following.


This is called one who rejects the training and returns to a lesser life because they’re afraid of the danger of sharks.
Ayaṃ vuccati, bhikkhave, susukābhayassa bhīto sikkhaṃ paccakkhāya hīnāyāvatto.
‘Danger of sharks’ is a term for females.
‘Susukābhayan’ti kho, bhikkhave, mātugāmassetaṃ adhivacanaṃ.

The way I understand they returned to lower life because they are not afraid of shark (females).


Bhante Sujato’s simple translation works better for me. I myself use “so” in this way in conversation. It is quite short and direct.

So, what do you think?

Oh. Interesting. What you wrote is actually how I read Bhante’s translation. Upon closer look, I see that what Bhante actually wrote is “afraid of the danger of”. Maybe “heedless” would work better instead of “afraid”. Yet I also have to say that my thought did indeed go the way Bhante intended.


I did not notice “So,Udayi” for some reason.
Perhaps I was tired at late at night or perhaps SCV played “So. Udayi” as a separat line.


In MN43:

  1. There is 2 versions of the inquiring monk’s name (as underlined).
  2. Further down the text the word “monk” was used instead of mendicant.

Thanks. We like the translation :sunny:


In Theragatha (2019 translation by Bhikkhu Sujato) there is an error with the text layout in book 16 (the book of the twenties) 2nd sutta in this book. Link here: SuttaCentral


Also, here is another error, also with the text layout, Thag 16.7: SuttaCentral


Might have something to do with the issue here: Report bugs for the new site here! 🐛


Minor suggestions . . .

DN 1, SC 37 & DN 2, SC 60
Story telling


DN 1, SC 40 & DN 2, SC 63
Head-bands . . . choweries . . .

Headbands . . . chowries? (I can’t find “chowery” in the dictionary.)




Choweries occurs in the following context:

There are some ascetics and brahmins who, while enjoying food given in faith, still engage in beautifying and adorning themselves with garlands, fragrance, and makeup. This includes such things as applying beauty products by anointing, massaging, bathing, and rubbing; mirrors, ointments, garlands, fragrances, and makeup; face-powder, foundation, bracelets, head-bands, fancy walking-sticks or containers, rapiers, parasols, fancy sandals, turbans, jewelry, choweries, and long-fringed white robes. The ascetic Gotama refrains from such beautification and adornment.’ Such is an ordinary person’s praise of the Realized One (DN 1 SC 40).

It seems to refer to some fancy garment/accessory. Image for chowry:

Though derived from Sanskrit, chaudhuri refers to a chief. It seems chaudhuri doesn’t fit the context. Not sure about the Pāli though.


Ah! I can certainly imagine a chodhury using a chowry to absent-mindedly whisk away the odd fly or mosquito.


:metal:“metal” --> “mental”


MN 101 #SC 15.4
“Everything this individual experiences—pleasurable, painful, or neutral—is because of past deeds. …”?’

What are the quotation marks referring to?

SuttaCentral Voice going one step further! V1.2.13 ready to go :-)

At DN16 (Mahaparinibanna sutta), first verse after Buddha parinibanna should be of Brahma Sahampati, rather than Sakka (SuttaCentral)

Parinibbute bhagavati saha parinibbānā brahmāsahampati imaṃ gāthaṃ abhāsi:
When the Buddha became fully extinguished, Sakka, lord of gods, recited this verse:


At MN141, i cannot found “association with the disliked is suffering; separation from the liked is suffering” in the pali text (SuttaCentral)

Rebirth is suffering; old age is suffering; death is suffering; sorrow, lamentation, pain, sadness, and distress are suffering; association with the disliked is suffering; separation from the liked is suffering; not getting what you wish for is suffering. In brief, the five grasping aggregates are suffering.
Jātipi dukkhā, jarāpi dukkhā, maraṇampi dukkhaṃ, sokaparidevadukkhadomanassupāyāsāpi dukkhā, yampicchaṃ na labhati tampi dukkhaṃ; saṅkhittena pañcupādānakkhandhā dukkhā.


I would think of it as a clarification of “yampicchaṃ na labhati tampi dukkhaṃ”, which modern minds might not grasp.



In the Mahaparinibbana Sutta we have an error:

When the Buddha became fully extinguished, Sakka, lord of gods, recited this verse:
Parinibbute bhagavati saha parinibbānā brahmāsahampati imaṃ gāthaṃ abhāsi:



In SN 4.25 we have the three daughters of Mara
taṇhā ca arati ca ragā - translated as
Craving, Delight, and Lust

But shouldn’t arati be ‘aversion’ instead? Is the translation maybe commentarial or interpreted differently?