A Buddhist discussion forum on the Dhamma of Theravāda Buddhism
https://www.dhammawheel.com/
The translation is I.B. Horner's.
Thanks Bhante. Ayya Vimala already clarified this for me on SuttaCentral. I had forgotten to edit my post.Dhammanando wrote:The translation is I.B. Horner's.
It seems this is not correct (anymore?). There is no translator information to be found there. But one can find it from the translation by clicking on the "hamburger menu" icon in the top left and then on "Metadata", as Ayya Vimala also explained.Dhammanando wrote:On Sutta Central if someone posts a link to an English translation, like this:
https://suttacentral.net/en/mn61
you can find out who the translator is by removing the "en" from the url:
https://suttacentral.net/mn61
which will take you to a page where all the site's available translations of the sutta are listed and the translators identified.
1. If you're alone and holding your cat and it starts to urinate on you, then you'll probably put it down out of disgust at the prospect of having your clothes soaked in cat's piss.
This virtue (sīla) is manifested as the kinds of purity stated thus: “Bodily purity, verbal purity, mental purity” (A. i. 271); it is manifested, comes to be apprehended, as a pure state. But moral shame (hiri) and moral caution (ottappa are said by those who know to be its proximate cause; its near reason, is the meaning. For when moral shame and moral caution are in existence, virtue arises and persists; and when they are not, it neither arises nor persists.
[...]
When a bhikkhu is devoted to recollection of the Buddha, he is respectful and deferential towards the Master. He attains fullness of faith, mindfulness, understanding and merit. He has much happiness and gladness. He conquers fear and dread. He is able to endure pain. He comes to feel as if he were living in the Master’s presence. And his body, when the recollection of the Buddha’s special qualities dwells in it, becomes as worthy of veneration as a shrine room. His mind tends toward the plane of the Buddhas. When he encounters an opportunity for transgression, he has awareness of moral shame and caution as vividly as though he were face to face with the Master. And if he penetrates no higher, he is at least headed for a happy destiny.
(The last two sentences are repeated in the accounts of recollection of the Dhamma, the Saṅgha, and peace)
[...]
It is ashamed of (hiriyati) bodily misconduct, etc., thus it is called moral shame (hiri). This is a term for modesty. It is cautious/apprehensive (ottappati) of those same things, thus it is called moral caution (ottappa). This is a term for anxiety about evil. Herein, moral shame has the characteristic of disgust at evil, while moral caution has the characteristic of dread of it. Shame has the function of not doing evil and that in the mode of modesty, while caution has the function of not doing it and that in the mode of dread. They are manifested as shrinking from evil in the way already stated. Their proximate causes are self-respect and respect of others [respectively]. A man rejects evil through shame out of respect for himself, as the daughter of a good family does; he rejects evil through caution out of respect for another, as a courtesan does. And these two states should be regarded as the guardians of the world.
I find this very difficult to understand.Dhammanando wrote: ↑Tue Nov 14, 2017 8:00 am1. If you're alone and holding your cat and it starts to urinate on you, then you'll probably put it down out of disgust at the prospect of having your clothes soaked in cat's piss.
2. If you're in company and a cat is urinating on you, then you'll probably put it down out of embarrassment at others seeing you being urinated on.
3. If you know that a cat has a habit of urinating on people, then you'll probably not want to pick it up because of the likely outcome of doing so.
Now if we replace cat's piss with misconduct, then #1 would be analogous to hiri, while #2 and #3 would be analogous to two different explanations that are given for ottappa.
I clean cat poo on a daily basis. I have no personal honor.Bhikkhu Bodhi wrote:/.../ While moral shame and fear of wrongdoing are united in the common task of protecting the mind from moral defilement, they differ in their individual characteristics and modes of operation. Hiri, the sense of shame, has an internal reference; it is rooted in self-respect and induces us to shrink from wrongdoing out of a feeling of personal honor. Ottappa, fear of wrongdoing, has an external orientation. It is the voice of conscience that warns us of the dire consequences of moral transgression: blame and punishment by others, the painful kammic results of evil deeds, the impediment to our desire for liberation from suffering. /.../
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/aut ... ay_23.html
Seriously, I don't normally think like what the above passage says. When blame and punishment by others are a given in one's life, and one's main transgression is that one is alive at all, blame and punishment by others aren't motivating; and when one's life has been miserable for as long as one can remember, getting more painful kammic results isn't motivating either (if one has already been crushed by tons of rocks, adding a few more rocks or pebbles really doesn't make a difference).What do I think the Buddha would think of me, if anything at all ... I think he'd be aloof.When he encounters an opportunity for transgression, he has awareness of moral shame and caution as vividly as though he were face to face with the Master.
/.../
(The last two sentences are repeated in the accounts of recollection of the Dhamma, the Saṅgha, and peace)
I don't understand the references to the daughter of a good family and a courtesan (I looked up the passage you quoted in the Visuddhimagga, but couldn't find a clarification).Visuddhimagga wrote:It is ashamed of (hiriyati) bodily misconduct, etc., thus it is called moral shame (hiri). This is a term for modesty. It is cautious/apprehensive (ottappati) of those same things, thus it is called moral caution (ottappa). This is a term for anxiety about evil. Herein, moral shame has the characteristic of disgust at evil, while moral caution has the characteristic of dread of it. Shame has the function of not doing evil and that in the mode of modesty, while caution has the function of not doing it and that in the mode of dread. They are manifested as shrinking from evil in the way already stated. Their proximate causes are self-respect and respect of others [respectively]. A man rejects evil through shame out of respect for himself, as the daughter of a good family does; he rejects evil through caution out of respect for another, as a courtesan does. And these two states should be regarded as the guardians of the world.
Doesn't this mean that the daughter of a good family will avoid compromising herself because she holds herself in high regard; whereas the courtesan will avoid such an encounter because she holds the honour of her lord or master in high regard, and doesn't wish to sully his reputation or anger him? The former rejects inappropriate men so she can avoid shame, and the latter so she can avoid harming her lover. Hiri is care of oneself, whereas ottappa is care of others.
If you click on the grey icon with three bars in the top-left corner, and then Metadata, you can see the name of the translator and other similar information.Dhammanando wrote: ↑Tue Nov 14, 2017 4:42 amThe translation is I.B. Horner's.
On Sutta Central if someone posts a link to an English translation, like this:
https://suttacentral.net/en/mn61
you can find out who the translator is by removing the "en" from the url:
https://suttacentral.net/mn61
which will take you to a page where all the site's available translations of the sutta are listed and the translators identified.
Dhammanando wrote: ↑Sun Nov 12, 2017 9:50 am Shame (hiri) is what restrains one from unwholesome acts by way of self-regard. Lack of shame (ahiri) is its opposite.
"Lack of remorse" is just a bad translation. Ottappa is moral caution or regard for consequences. It's what restrains one from unwholesome acts either by consideration of how they will be viewed by others or out of regard for their undesirable consequences. Anottappa is its opposite: moral recklessness or disregard for consequences.
I think my understanding of hiri and ottappa were incorrect, and that hiri might often be mistranslated by a lot of translators.Dhammanando wrote: ↑Mon Nov 13, 2017 7:40 am The Buddha never commends feeling remorseful, for remorse (kukkucca is a hindrance and always unskilful. The passage you allude to advises not remorse, but rather reflection on the nature of a mental action one has performed.
If hiri and ottappa are present on an occasion when there is an opportunity to do something unwholesome, then one won't do it.
Yes. However, in some contexts (especially in Vinaya) kukkucca is also used for the concern that a morally earnest person experiences when considering whether something he is about to do, or is considering doing, is right or wrong. Hence the differing translations of the term: regret/remorse and worry.
I don't know of anything better than "moral shame" for hiri, while for ottappa I'm torn between "moral caution" and "regard for consequences".
Yes, I think so. There are some further illustrations of the terms in the Atthasālinī:
In the last pair, hiri is that which abominates or shrinks from. It is a synonym for shame. Ottappa is [lit.] “glowing” [i.e., with nervous heat]. It is a synonym for agitation at evil. In the table of contents shame was stated to be the characteristic. In the following detailed discourse will be shown their mutual difference, their origin and how they are influenced. Hiri has a subjective origin, ottappa has an external cause. Hiri is influenced by the self, ottappa is influenced by the world. Hiri is rooted in the intrinsic nature of shame, ottappa in the intrinsic nature of fear. Hiri has the characteristic of respectful obedience, ottappa that of viewing a fault with timidity and fear.
Of the two, hiri with its subjective origin, arises from four causes: consideration of birth, of age, of heroism, of wide experience. How?
‘This evil act is not such as would be done by those of good birth; it is such as those of low birth, fishermen and the like, would do; it is not fitting that such as I who am well-born should do it,’ — thus considering one’s birth, and not committing evil such as life-taking, etc., one maintains [a standard of] hiri.
Again, ‘This evil act is only worthy of boys; it is not fitting that one of my years should do it,’ — thus considering age, hiri is maintained.’
Again, ‘This evil act is an act for the weak; it is not fitting that I, who have courage and strength, should do it,’ — thus considering, one refrains and maintains hiri.
Again, ‘This evil act is an act for blind fools and not for the wise; it is not fitting that I, endowed with wisdom and wide experience, should do it,’ — thus considering one’s wide experience, one refrains and maintains hiri.
Having thus set up hiri by introducing it into the mind, one does not do evil acts, and thus hiri has a subjective origin.
How has ottappa an external origin? ‘If you do an evil act, you will get blame among the four assemblies.
‘The wise will blame you. As the citizen
Shuns all impurity, the good shun you.
How, bhikkhu, will you do that which is wrong?’
Thus considering, one does not do evil owing to ottappa from without. Thus ottappa has an external origin.
How is hiri influenced by the self? Take a certain son of noble family who makes self the chief influence, and so refrains from evil: ‘It is not fit that such a man as I, who left the world through faith, endowed with wide experience, believing in the ascetic life, should do evil.’ Thus is hiri influenced by the self. Hence the Blessed One has said: ‘He makes self the chief influence, and abandons immorality, develops morality, abandons faults and develops faultlessness, and keeps himself pure.’
How is ottappa influenced by the world? Here a certain son of noble family makes the world the chief influence and does not do evil. As the Blessed One has said: ‘Wide indeed is the world; in the wide world are monks and brahmins of supernormal potency, with clairvoyance and knowledge of others’ thoughts. They see afar, although near at hand they are not seen; mentally they know the thoughts of others, me also (he thinks) they will know thus: “Look at this son of noble family. Though he has become a monk by faith, leaving his home for the homeless state, he lives mixed with evil immoral things. There are spirits with supernormal potency, clairvoyance, knowing the thoughts of others. They see afar,” etc. Thus he makes the world the chief influence, abandons immorality, develops morality, abandons faults and develops faultlessness, and keeps himself pure.’ Thus ottappa is influenced by the world.
Hiri is rooted in the intrinsic nature of shame, ottappa in that of dread. Herein shame means the manner of being ashamed, and hiri is rooted in the intrinsic nature of that. Dread means the fear of purgatory, and ottappa is rooted in the intrinsic nature of that. And both are manifested in the avoiding of evil. For a certain son of noble family, in obeying the calls of nature, on seeing a certain person worthy of respect, would manifest shame, would be ashamed. In the same way, sunken in an internal sense of shame he does not do evil. A certain man frightened by the fear of purgatory does not commit sin. Here is an illustration: As of two iron balls, one being cold and besmeared with dung, the other being hot and burning, a wise man does not catch the cold one from loathing its being smeared with dung, nor the other one for fear of getting burnt. Here the not grasping the cold ball from loathing its being smeared with dung is like the not doing wrong from being sunk in an internal sense of shame. The not grasping the hot ball from fear of being burnt should be considered as the not doing evil from fear of purgatory.
Hiri has the characteristic of respectful obedience, ottappa that of viewing with timidity the fearful aspect of wrong-doing. This pair is manifested in the avoiding of evil. A certain man, indeed, from the four causes of consideration for his high birth, for the dignity of his Teacher, for the greatness of his inheritance, for the honour of his fellow-brethren, produces hiri with the characteristic of respectful obedience and does not do evil. A certain man, from the four causes of self-accusation, of accusation by others, of punishment, of evil destiny, produces ottappa with the characteristic of viewing with timidity the fearful aspect of wrong-doing and does not do evil. Herein considerations for high birth, etc., and fear of self-accusation, etc., can [as above] be explained in detail.
I think it's fearfulness of his anger.
One teacher I know has translated the pairing as "conscience and concern". It's from a retrospective album title by the folk group Peter Paul & Mary (one of whom is a Buddhist) and this particular teacher likes it because it is less off-putting for lay audiences who might jib at words like "shame", "dread", etc.Dhammanando wrote: ↑Wed Nov 15, 2017 10:07 amI don't know of anything better than "moral shame" for hiri, while for ottappa I'm torn between "moral caution" and "regard for consequences".
http://ajahnsucitto.org/articles/the-graduated-path/Ajahn Chah once summed up the entire Vinaya, the samana’s sīla, as one thing: to live with conscience and concern (hiri-ottappa).
In that case, hiri and ottappa would be universally, invariably presernt in everyone, making the two concepts redundant.chownah wrote: ↑Wed Nov 15, 2017 11:41 amI am hesitant to say that this stuff is relative as I fear (ottappa?) it will cause discord and I'm sure you know how hard I try to avoid discord....but....the only way so far that I have seen to make sense of this stuff is to say that perhaps hiri is simply not living up to whatever standards one holds for ones self and that ottappa is simply not living up to whatever standards one thinks that other people hold for ones self.
Am I in the twilight zone with this thinking?
Assuming that they are good standards, hiri and ottappa are the two mental factors that ensure that you do live up to them.chownah wrote: ↑Wed Nov 15, 2017 11:41 am I am hesitant to say that this stuff is relative as I fear (ottappa?) it will cause discord and I'm sure you know how hard I try to avoid discord....but....the only way so far that I have seen to make sense of this stuff is to say that perhaps hiri is simply not living up to whatever standards one holds for ones self and that ottappa is simply not living up to whatever standards one thinks that other people hold for ones self.
Am I in the twilight zone with this thinking?
Good according to whose idea of goodness?Dhammanando wrote: ↑Wed Nov 15, 2017 4:21 pmAssuming that they are good standards, hiri and ottappa are the two mental factors that ensure that you do live up to them.