Bhante @sujato I feel that SN22.62 is not translated properly.
Please see the discussion in Dhamma Wheel.
Kind regards
https://dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=34582&p=516480#p516480
1 Like
I am Oyamist on SE. You quoted my lay understanding of Bhante Sujatoās translation.
In what way do you find Bhanteās translation improper?
1 Like
This is more of a discussion of opinions rather than a reporting of errors or typos. As such I am moving it to the Translations thread. Also please note that many do not have accounts on other forums, therefore if you have an argument/point to make, please outline the actual details here, without simply referencing to some other discussion.
5 Likes
Wow!!
So you are the Oyamist gave that great answer!!
Well I understood your answer rather than reading the translation of Bhante Sujato.
Even BBās translation was clear to me as well.
So basically I post my comment on your anwer as your answer was very mudh clear to me.
Well if you think Bhante Sujatoās translation is clear to you, it is perhaps due to my poor English or now I read the same with a new understading.
Any way at least now I found out who Oyamist is!!
By the way I quoted your answer below for others benefit.
1 Like
2
Clearly the past, present and future (was, is, will be) are all evident and incontestible (i.e., uncorrupted and without defilements). Therefore, this sutta implies that the corruption and defilements arise taking the past, present and future as other than what they are. Indeed, suffering arises when we take the past as the present (remorse or sadness). Or suffering arises when we take the past as the future (craving or aversion). Or suffering arises when we take the past or future as the present (delusion). Mixing up past, present and future is suffering.
Yet if one directly knows what was, is and will be:
He directly knows water ā¦ fire ā¦ air ā¦ creatures ā¦ gods ā¦ the Creator ā¦ BrahmÄ ā¦ the gods of streaming radiance ā¦ the gods replete with glory ā¦ the gods of abundant fruit ā¦ the Overlord ā¦ the dimension of infinite space ā¦ the dimension of infinite consciousness ā¦ the dimension of nothingness ā¦ the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception ā¦ the seen ā¦ the heard ā¦ the thought ā¦ the known ā¦ oneness ā¦ diversity ā¦ all ā¦ He directly knows extinguishment as extinguishment. But he doesnāt identify with extinguishment, he doesnāt identify regarding extinguishment, he doesnāt identify as extinguishment, he doesnāt identify that āextinguishment is mineā, he doesnāt take pleasure in extinguishment. Why is that? Because he has understood that relishing is the root of suffering, and that rebirth comes from continued existence; whoever has come to be gets old and dies. Thatās why the Realized Oneāwith the ending, fading away, cessation, giving up, and letting go of all cravingsāhas awakened to the supreme perfect Awakening, I say āMN1
sutras - SN 22.62: What is meant by "scope of language"? - Buddhism Stack Exchange
2 Likes
By the way, I invite Bhante @Dhammanando or any other person to explain the meaning of this Sutta in his own words. I still feel uncertain about the meaning and intention of this Sutta.
1 Like
Can someone give some examples for niruttipathÄ adhivacanapathÄ paƱƱattipathÄ
What are these three?
āMendicants, there are these three scopes of language, terminology, and descriptions. Theyāre uncorrupted, as they have been since the beginning. Theyāre not being corrupted now, nor will they be. Sensible ascetics and brahmins donāt look down on them.
āTayome, bhikkhave, niruttipathÄ adhivacanapathÄ paƱƱattipathÄ asaį¹ kiį¹į¹Ä asaį¹ kiį¹į¹apubbÄ, na saį¹ kÄ«yanti, na saį¹ kÄ«yissanti, appaį¹ikuį¹į¹hÄ samaį¹ehi brÄhmaį¹ehi viĆ±Ć±Å«hi.
paƱƱattipathÄ sounds like the first precept.