I think that was Nyanamoli’s choice too, it’s very precisely accurate. It’s certainly better than “destruction”, which is simply incorrect. But it’s hard to make it work idiomatically. Consistency and readability are hard to balance!
2 Likes
I think readability is quite okay for “The exhaustion of craving triumphs over all suffering,” so long as we understand “exhaustion” correctly.
Besides, it makes sense practically. With the wisdom to know and see according to reality, the mind stops craving. Although the old habit (old kamma) of craving still remains, with the wisdom, it’s a matter of time that it exhausts itself.
Which is why I personally really appreciate translators who provide a footnote clarifying the sense in which the translator has used the word.
1 Like
Yes- except if a translation requires a footnote is it sucessful?
1 Like
Should be okay in this case. I expect the reader to be intelligent enough to know it doesn’t mean “fatigue”.
I’m going to guess that’s a minority of the English-speaking public, which is fine if that’s what you want. I do like it as a rendering, I just found it tricky to apply.
In English, “exhaustion of craving” has a double meaning, but I suspect that many if not most readers will understand ‘to crave is exhausting’ first.
I’m not sure this word play exists in the Pali.
That would certainly be an interest word play, but to my knowledge, khaya is never used to mean “fatigue” in the texts.
Anyway, if we’re familiar with usual ways khaya and its other manifestations, like khīṇa and khīyati, are used on the texts, it should be obvious what they mean. Presently, people are still much conditioned to think of them as “destruction” and “destroyed”.
Yes, but the challenge is to translate for those who do not know Pali already, who aren’t familiar with the source text and its correspondence across the canon.
What I meant is the concept, not the Pali words. Imagine if in place of “destruction” and “destroyed” in English translations, we have “exhaustion” and “exhausted”.