Another Amaro translation question

A forum for members who wish to develop a deeper understanding of the Pali Canon and associated Commentaries, which for discussion purposes are both treated as authoritative.

Moderator: Mahavihara moderator

Another Amaro translation question

Postby fivebells » Wed May 22, 2013 11:41 pm

On p. 84 of Small Boat, Great Mountain, Amaro translates SN 858 as

“The wise do not take
anything in the world as belonging to them, nor do they take
anything in the world as not belonging to them either.”"


I assume this is the same line Thanissaro translated as

[One said to be at peace is one] For whom
nothing in the world
is his own,
who doesn't grieve
over what is not,
who doesn't enter into
doctrines
phenomena:[9]

[9]: "Doctrines, phenomena" — two meanings of the Pali word, dhamma.


Is that correct? If so, one or both of these translations must be very free, or the original must be very ambiguous. Anyone looked into this?
fivebells
 
Posts: 299
Joined: Thu Mar 12, 2009 12:52 am

Re: Another Amaro translation question

Postby Cittasanto » Thu May 23, 2013 6:28 am

Hi Fivebells,
Ajahn Amaro isnt a translator like Thanissaro is, and freely admits to this in publications. as this book you are reading is a transcription of talks you may find that these are more interpretive than Thanissaro.
This offering maybe right, or wrong, but it is one, the other, both, or neither!
With Metta
Upāsaka Cittasanto
Blog, - Some Suttas Translated, Ajahn Chah.
"Others will misconstrue reality due to their personal perspectives, doggedly holding onto and not easily discarding them; We shall not misconstrue reality due to our own personal perspectives, nor doggedly holding onto them, but will discard them easily. This effacement shall be done."
User avatar
Cittasanto
 
Posts: 5751
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin

Re: Another Amaro translation question

Postby mikenz66 » Thu May 23, 2013 7:18 am

Here is another modern translation:
The Aṭṭhakavagga – Pali, with English Translation
Paññobhāsa Bhikkhu
http://pathpress.wordpress.com/2012/06/ ... anslation/

He for whom there is nothing his own in the world,
And who does not sorrow over what is not there,
And who does not go by philosophies—
He truly is said to be “at peace.”


:anjali:
Mike
User avatar
mikenz66
 
Posts: 10396
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: Another Amaro translation question

Postby piotr » Thu May 23, 2013 9:30 am

And Norman's translation:

    861. For whom there is nothing (called) his own in the world, and who does not grieve because of what does not exist, and does not go (astray) among mental phenomena, he truly is called “calmed”.
Last edited by piotr on Thu May 23, 2013 9:35 am, edited 1 time in total.
Bhagavaṃmūlakā no, bhante, dhammā...
User avatar
piotr
 
Posts: 371
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 4:33 pm
Location: Khettadesa

Re: Another Amaro translation question

Postby piotr » Thu May 23, 2013 9:35 am

On second thought, I think it's more likely that Ajahn Amaro is refering to verse which is translated by Norman as:

    858. For him there are no sons or cattle, field(s), (or) property. For him there is nothing taken up or laid down.

or by Thanissaro Bhikkhu as:

    He has no children
    cattle,
    fields,
    land.
    In him you can't pin down
    what's embraced
    or rejected.[7]
Bhagavaṃmūlakā no, bhante, dhammā...
User avatar
piotr
 
Posts: 371
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 4:33 pm
Location: Khettadesa

Re: Another Amaro translation question

Postby fivebells » Thu May 23, 2013 5:40 pm

Thanks, Piotr, that's a big help.

Cittasanto: Who cares? I still need to judge whether what he's saying is correct or not and what his agenda is beyond teaching dhamma. Perhaps if he's not a translator he shouldn't be doing his own translating.
fivebells
 
Posts: 299
Joined: Thu Mar 12, 2009 12:52 am

Re: Another Amaro translation question

Postby Cittasanto » Thu May 23, 2013 8:56 pm

fivebells wrote:
Cittasanto: Who cares? I still need to judge whether what he's saying is correct or not and what his agenda is beyond teaching dhamma. Perhaps if he's not a translator he shouldn't be doing his own translating.

it is something to bare in mind. and if you don't care what is with so many questions about it? he isn't a translator the book based on talks at a vajrayana retreat he was a co-teacher at has more than enough context to decide whether or not it is inline or not with the Dhamma.
This offering maybe right, or wrong, but it is one, the other, both, or neither!
With Metta
Upāsaka Cittasanto
Blog, - Some Suttas Translated, Ajahn Chah.
"Others will misconstrue reality due to their personal perspectives, doggedly holding onto and not easily discarding them; We shall not misconstrue reality due to our own personal perspectives, nor doggedly holding onto them, but will discard them easily. This effacement shall be done."
User avatar
Cittasanto
 
Posts: 5751
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin

Re: Another Amaro translation question

Postby fivebells » Thu May 23, 2013 9:17 pm

Obviously, I care about the accuracy of what he's saying. I don't really care about the excuses for any inaccuracies. I'm not doing this to show him up, I want to know what the bases for his arguments are.
fivebells
 
Posts: 299
Joined: Thu Mar 12, 2009 12:52 am

Re: Another Amaro translation question

Postby Cittasanto » Thu May 23, 2013 10:17 pm

fivebells wrote:Obviously, I care about the accuracy of what he's saying. I don't really care about the excuses for any inaccuracies. I'm not doing this to show him up, I want to know what the bases for his arguments are.

read the book, look at what he is saying in the context there first, he may be using the short passage as it can have a subtle meaning in and of itself.
But don't mistake pointing something out as an excuse. there is allot of leeway in translating, and what makes sense and is accurate for one is not always true for another for a wide variety of reasons, just look at translations of Dukkha, or the current thread on the Dhammachakkhapavattenasutta.
This offering maybe right, or wrong, but it is one, the other, both, or neither!
With Metta
Upāsaka Cittasanto
Blog, - Some Suttas Translated, Ajahn Chah.
"Others will misconstrue reality due to their personal perspectives, doggedly holding onto and not easily discarding them; We shall not misconstrue reality due to our own personal perspectives, nor doggedly holding onto them, but will discard them easily. This effacement shall be done."
User avatar
Cittasanto
 
Posts: 5751
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin


Return to Classical Theravāda

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 4 guests