"disenchantment" or "revulsion"?

Exploring Theravāda's connections to other paths - what can we learn from other traditions, religions and philosophies?
PeterB
Posts: 3909
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 12:35 pm

Re: "disenchantment" or "revulsion"?

Post by PeterB »

Jhana4 wrote:
TMingyur wrote:From another thread:
TMingyur wrote:As to the Upanisa Sutta I noticed that where Thanissaro B. has "disenchantment" B. Bodhi has "revulsion". This difference in translation seem to pervade all their sutta translations.

The connotations of some alternate word choices for translations seem to foster what is reminiscent of a puritan orthodoxy to me. "Revulsion" vs "disenchantment" is one example. "Defilements" vs "hindrances" is another. Why an American born in modern times would want to risk encouraging such a puritanish orthodoxish mentality is a mystery.

To give Bhikku Bodhi the benefit of the doubt, he simply may be picking the words that are most technically correct by his view. I don't know Pali. I wonder though if anyone does. Pali is a dead language. Students depend on teachers to convey the words and the connotations to them. Mistakes and misunderstands likely happened over 2000 years passing down that knowledge. There is no place where people still speak Pali to go and check and if there was that wouldn't mean that a "modern Pali" would use words in the same ways as an ancient Pali.

An accurate translation of the Pali Canon may be something forever beyond our reach.
Pali is not a " dead language " . Pali was and is to all extents and purposes an artificially constructed literary language , which was possibly never spoken outside of its own context, and which evolved precisely because none of the lingua franca past or present could convey the subtleties that were in need of expression and which yields its meaning only to those who go to it with the right mindset. It was ever thus. It was true for ancient Thais and Burmese. It was true for Sri Lankans . There was no place where Pali was spoken as the language of the market place. It evolved for a specific purpose and to attempt to bypass that is to lose sight of that purpose.
It does not yield itself to those who would drag IT into THEIR world view even if they have the extraordinary good fortune to be modern Americans...Pali is not Iraq. The Dhamma is not understood by using in as a vehicle to reject or subvert ones own cultural conditioning merely.
Personally I find homilies from those whose half digested ideas about Dhamma reveal themselves at every turn a valuable lesson in Kshanti...As one who after nearly forty years is still chewing..
"Oh" as the poet Burns has it " for the gift to see ourselves as others see us".

No amount of spin will alter the fact the Buddha saw as a prerequisite of understanding his dhamma a degree of turning away from life as conventionally lived. And turning away with some urgency. Buddha Dhamma is not a series of positive affirmations. It should and does lead to a greater degree of happiness, but that happiness comes at a cost. And the cost is a degree of disillusionment with and rejection of the kama, passing world . And if that rankles then we need to ask ourselves if we are in the right place.
User avatar
Adrien
Posts: 110
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2010 9:31 pm
Location: France

Re: "disenchantment" or "revulsion"?

Post by Adrien »

When I say "disenchantment", I'm thinking "not fooled anymore", and I would express it as : "it doesn't interest me anymore".

But I'm really wondering if nibbida could be a bit more. What drives common people's lifes is the pleasant and the unpleasant. What drives the people well established in the spiritual path is the wholesome and the unwholesome. It's like a new sort of liking and disliking (they don't "feel" the same about the wholesome and the unwholesome), but totally different, with no craving.

Are the sensual pleasures seen by the spiritual person as "not interesting" (neutral), or as "an undesirable thing" (unwholesome, dangerous) ?

Disenchantment is exactly the same as dispassion, except that what I'm disenchanted at, I once was enchanted by it (which is not necessarly the case for things I'm dispassionated at). But in the present, the feeling is exactly the same.
I would say that the "spiritual person" has this feeling (dispassion) about eating average bread, or walking in a corridor (pure neutral things -> he just doesn't care), while he would have "nibbida" for sensual pleasures, as he has nibbida for killing and stealing. In a way, these people do not "like" killing, they have a kind of repulsion for it, but that doesn't mean there is aversion. In a same way, they could have a kind of repulsion for the sensual pleasures, without any aversion.

__________________
Writing this message made me notice that in the two translations of nibbida, one involves the past while the other doesn't :
- disenchantmant -> in the past, I liked it (but I don't anymore).
- revulsion -> dosen't say anything about the past.
Please don't hesitate to correct my english if you feel to
User avatar
Kim OHara
Posts: 5584
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:47 am
Location: North Queensland, Australia

Re: "disenchantment" or "revulsion"?

Post by Kim OHara »

I'm with Retro and others in preferring 'disenchantment'.
To me, 'revulsion' is too close to 'aversion'.
My nearest dictionary gave me 'disillusionment', 'dissatisfaction' and 'world-weariness' as alternatives for 'disenchantment', and they feel about right: knowing that worldly pleasures are limited and temporary, we should stop craving for them, stop thinking that they can solve our dissatisfactions, and look for something better.
The same dictionary gave me 'disgust', 'nausea', 'loathing' and 'aversion' itself as alternatives to 'revulsion'. They are all much stronger words than any in the first group, and they therefore describe a stronger emotional engagement with the object of the feeling. Such an engagement may be a necessary short-term antidote to a strong positive engagement but should be transcended - the long term aim, surely, is dispassion and equanimity, not aversion.

:namaste:
Kim
User avatar
ground
Posts: 2591
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:01 am

Re: "disenchantment" or "revulsion"?

Post by ground »

Interesting comments ... but still ... I think I cannot agree with the predominant view which seems to express that 'disgust', 'nausea', 'loathing' amd 'aversion' are "wrong" in the first place, i.e. "naturally wrong".

In other contexts the Buddha e.g. accepted as a good qualities those that are considered "wrong" in worldly contexts e.g. "desire" for liberation or "grief" based on a longing for liberation that is not yet attained.

IMO if one feels 'disgust', 'nausea', 'loathing' and even 'aversion' towards the habitual appearance of allure of (inanimate or animate) objects (of mind) because one knows "what is behind the curtain" then this enhances consequent renunciation. What is important however is not to show it to the outside world because it is directed against one's own habits as such (i.e. underlying tendencies of which there is no possessor!!).

Kind regards
User avatar
Alex123
Posts: 4035
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: "disenchantment" or "revulsion"?

Post by Alex123 »

TMingyur wrote:Interesting comments ... but still ... I think I cannot agree with the predominant view which seems to express that 'disgust', 'nausea', 'loathing' amd 'aversion' are "wrong" in the first place, i.e. "naturally wrong".

In other contexts the Buddha e.g. accepted as a good qualities those that are considered "wrong" in worldly contexts e.g. "desire" for liberation or "grief" based on a longing for liberation that is not yet attained.

IMO if one feels 'disgust', 'nausea', 'loathing' and even 'aversion' towards the habitual appearance of allure of (inanimate or animate) objects (of mind) because one knows "what is behind the curtain" then this enhances consequent renunciation. What is important however is not to show it to the outside world because it is directed against one's own habits as such (i.e. underlying tendencies of which there is no possessor!!).

Kind regards
I think you are right. The Buddha has stated that He himself:

"Seeing this drawback to the miracle of telepathy, Kevatta, I feel horrified, humiliated, and disgusted with the miracle of telepathy."
"Imaṃ kho ahaṃ kevaḍḍha iddhipāṭihāriye ādīnavaṃ sampassamāno iddhipāṭihāriyena aṭṭiyāmi harāyāmi jigucchāmi.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"And how is one a person in training (sekho hoti pāṭipado), someone following the way? There is the case where, when seeing a form with the eye, there arises in a monk what is agreeable, what is disagreeable, what is agreeable & disagreeable. He feels horrified, humiliated, & disgusted (aṭṭīyati harāyati jīgucchati) with the arisen agreeable thing... disagreeable thing... agreeable & disagreeable thing.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Sariputta, an Arahant:
Venerable sir, just as a woman, man or child fond of adornment, when had bathed the head, was to be wrapped round the neck with the carcase of a snake dog or a human would loathe it and be disgusted of it. In the same manner, I abide disgusted and loathing this putrid body. (iminā pūtikāyena aṭṭīyāmi harāyāmi jigucchāmi.) Venerable sir, if mindfulness of the body in the body was not established, I would have offended a certain co-associate in the holy life and without reconciling, would have left on a tour.
http://metta.lk/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/ ... ggo-e.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

aṭṭiyāmi =I am in trouble; worried.
harāyāmi = I am ashamed, depressed or vexed; worried.
jigucchāmi = I shun; loathe; is disgusted at.
pūti=rotten; putrid; stinking.

So revulsion is in nibbidā, feels tame in comparison with aṭṭīyati, harāyati, jīgucchati and pūtikāya.
Nyana
Posts: 2233
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 11:56 am

Re: "disenchantment" or "revulsion"?

Post by Nyana »

Kim O'Hara wrote:The same dictionary gave me 'disgust', 'nausea', 'loathing' and 'aversion' itself as alternatives to 'revulsion'. They are all much stronger words than any in the first group, and they therefore describe a stronger emotional engagement with the object of the feeling. Such an engagement may be a necessary short-term antidote to a strong positive engagement but should be transcended - the long term aim, surely, is dispassion and equanimity, not aversion.
Indeed.

All the best,

Geoff
PeterB
Posts: 3909
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 12:35 pm

Re: "disenchantment" or "revulsion"?

Post by PeterB »

But longer term Upekkha may depend on precisely that short term turning away from, with some degree of dispatch.
We are not encouraged to cultivate equanimous feelings to strong attachment..or to be in denial of same.
The trouble is some 21 st century Buddhists are so genteel that they outdo the Buddha in their sensibility.
Nyana
Posts: 2233
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 11:56 am

Re: "disenchantment" or "revulsion"?

Post by Nyana »

PeterB wrote:The trouble is some 21 st century Buddhists are so genteel that they outdo the Buddha in their sensibility.
Of course. That's unbalanced dhamma-lite. And the other extreme -- unbalanced asceticism -- can lead to repression, bitterness, misogynistic attitudes, and so on.

All the best,

Geoff
User avatar
reflection
Posts: 1116
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 9:27 pm

Re: "disenchantment" or "revulsion"?

Post by reflection »

It arises after 'seeing things as they are', which means stream entry. According to the suttas, stream enterers will be fully enlightened within at most 7 lives. They'll probably fully lose interest in the 5 sense world quite some time before that, this is impreventable. So nibbida is the force that drives them there. It's not like it's a choice. Therefore I would say revulsion is a good term, but a better translation could be repulsion, to emphasize the natural and impreventable aspect of it.

But in the end it is not really important how you translate a word which point to something that can't be explained in words anyway.
User avatar
Kim OHara
Posts: 5584
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:47 am
Location: North Queensland, Australia

Re: "disenchantment" or "revulsion"?

Post by Kim OHara »

'Repulsion' is a good suggestion, Reflection - thanks.
But I do think the most accurate possible translation is worthwhile. Language isn't perfect but it's the only medium we have, and an inaccurate translation gives rise to a misleading statement in the second language.

:namaste:
Kim
pulga
Posts: 1501
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 3:02 pm

Re: "disenchantment" or "revulsion"?

Post by pulga »

Ven. Ñanamoli translated nibbida as "estrangement". He has a lengthy note on the word in his Three Cardinal Dicourses :

ESTRANGEMENT: the Pali noun nibbida and its verb nibbindati are made up from the prefix nir in its negative sense of “out,” and the root vid (to find, to feel, to know intimately). Nibbida is thus a finding out. What is thus found out is the intimate hidden contradictoriness in any kind of self-identification based in any way on these things (and there is no way of determining self-identification apart from them — see under NOT-SELF). Elsewhere the Buddha says:

Whatever there is there of form, feeling, perception, determinations, or consciousness, such ideas he sees as impermanent, as subject to pain, as a sickness, as a tumour, as a barb, as a calamity, as an affliction, as an alienation, as a disintegration, as void, as not-self. He averts his heart from those ideas, and for the most peaceful, the supreme goal, he turns his heart to the deathless element, that is to say, the stilling of all determinations, the relinquishment of all substance, the exhaustion of craving, the fading of passion, cessation, extinction. (MN64)

The “stuff” of life can also be seen thus. Normally the discovery of a contradiction is for the unliberated mind a disagreeable one. Several courses are then open. It can refuse to face it, pretending to itself to the point of full persuasion and belief that no contradiction is there; or one side of the contradiction may be unilaterally affirmed and the other repressed and forgotten; or a temporary compromise may be found (all of which expedients are haunted by insecurity); or else the contradiction may be faced in its truth and made the basis for a movement towards liberation. So too, on finding estrangement thus, two main courses are open: either the search, leaving “craving for self-identification” intact, can be continued for sops to allay the symptoms of the sickness; or else a movement can be started in the direction of a cure for the underlying sickness of craving, and liberation from the everlasting hunt for palliatives, whether for oneself or others. In this sense alone, “Self protection is the protection of others, and protection of others self-protection” (Satipatthana Samyutta).
"Dhammā=Ideas. This is the clue to much of the Buddha's teaching." ~ Ven. Ñanavira, Commonplace Book
Nyana
Posts: 2233
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 11:56 am

Re: "disenchantment" or "revulsion"?

Post by Nyana »

pulga wrote:Ven. Ñanamoli translated nibbida as "estrangement".
Elsewhere he translates nibbidā as "disenchantment." In fact, he's probably the one who first used "disenchantment" as a translation of the term. "Estrangement" is fine too, although the analysis he offers for how he came to this choice is a bit convoluted. Horner has translated the term as "turns away from." This works too. As does "revulsion." The only qualm I would have with "revulsion" is that it has somewhat too narrow of a meaning. Olendzki comments on nibbidā as follows:
  • There is a story in the texts that usefully illustrates the meaning of this important term. A dog stumbles across a bone that has been exposed to the elements for many months and has been therefore bleached of any residual flesh or marrow. The dog gnaws on it for some time before he finally determines that he is “not finding” any satisfaction in the bone, and he thus turns away from it in disgust. It is not that the bone is intrinsically disgusting; it is rather the case that the dog’s raging desire for meat just will not be satisfied by the bone. He is enchanted by the prospect of gratification as he scrapes away furiously at the bone, but when he finally wakes up to the truth that the bone is empty of anything that will offer him satisfaction, he becomes disenchanted and spits it out in disgust.
At any rate, it's always helpful to have access to the work of multiple translators. No single translation is going to convey the full meaning of every passage and every term in every context.

All the best,

Geoff
User avatar
Alex123
Posts: 4035
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: "disenchantment" or "revulsion"?

Post by Alex123 »

Hello Geoff,

Very interesting quote above. As I understand it, nibbidā is not reaction toward the object itself, but toward craving or trying to find ultimate sukha for it.

In that case, I think that revulsion is actually a good word, and it is not dosa.

In Pali canon, I've noticed quite a few places where the Buddha, or Sariputta has felt "aṭṭiyāmi harāyāmi jigucchāmi" . How do you think they are to be translated?

In MN152, sekha is supposed to feel "aṭṭīyati harāyati jīgucchati" with whatever feeling arises. What do you think it supposed to mean? These words seem to be as strong, if not stronger than nibbidā.
User avatar
kirk5a
Posts: 1959
Joined: Thu Sep 23, 2010 1:51 pm

Re: "disenchantment" or "revulsion"?

Post by kirk5a »

It seems to me that whatever the intensity towards the object is - whether it be "disenchantment" or "revulsion" - the importance of that is to allow the letting go of (whatever it is we've become disenchanted with/repulsed by). That is, not clinging to it. Having dropped something, if someone wants to put it back in my hands to insist that I have not been sufficiently horrified by it... very well.. let's take another look... yep still not worth clinging to...
"When one thing is practiced & pursued, ignorance is abandoned, clear knowing arises, the conceit 'I am' is abandoned, latent tendencies are uprooted, fetters are abandoned. Which one thing? Mindfulness immersed in the body." -AN 1.230
chownah
Posts: 9336
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: "disenchantment" or "revulsion"?

Post by chownah »

My interest in discussing the two words is to determine whether it is an arising of passion or a fanning of passion already arisen...or.... if it is a cooling of passion or extinguishment of passion that is intended by the Buddha......for me "disenchantment" would indicate a cooling while "revulsion" would be the arising or fanning of passion.
chownah
Post Reply