Is this a grave mistake in DN22 translation? It appears both Ven. Thanissaro and Bhante Sujato have made a grave translation error [in DN22](https://suttacentral.net/dn22/en/sujato?layout=linebyline#1.7) . > “Mendicants, the four kinds of mindfulness meditation are the path to convergence. They are in order to purify sentient beings, to get past sorrow and crying, to make an end of pain and sadness, to end the cycle of suffering, and to realize extinguishment. > > “Ekāyano ayaṃ, bhikkhave, maggo sattānaṃ visuddhiyā, sokaparidevānaṃ samatikkamāya dukkhadomanassānaṃ atthaṅgamāya ñāyassa adhigamāya nibbānassa sacchikiriyāya, yadidaṃ cattāro satipaṭṭhānā. Ven. Vijithananda explain this in a different way. "Attangamaya" means not "make to and end of pain and sadness" but taking them as not I, me, or mine.

Vietnamese sentence: Như nói có linh hồn người chết, nói có Phật tánh, có thế giới siêu hình là nói dối, vì đó là cảnh giới tưởng, cảnh giới không có thật. - AI version 1: For example, asserting the existence of souls after death, Buddha-nature, or supernatural realms is false speech because these belong to imaginary realms, which are not real. - AI version 2: For instance, asserting the existence of souls of the dead, Buddha-nature, or metaphysical worlds is lying, as these belong to the realm of imagination, an unreal realm. - Thu: For example, saying there is the spirit of the deceased, saying there is Buddha-nature and a metaphysical world is false speech / lying, because there are realms of imagination, realms that do not truly exist. - Loi: For example, saying that there are spirits of the deceased, that there is Buddha-nature, or that there are supernatural worlds is false speech, because these are imaginary realms that do not exist. - Nhan: For example, saying that there are spirits of the deceased, that there is Buddha-nature, or that there are metaphysical worlds is false speech, as these are imaginary realms that do not truly exist. - Lin Đa: For example, saying there are spirits of the deceased, saying there is Buddha-nature, saying there are metaphysical worlds is false speech, because these are imagined realms, realms that do not exist. As a native-English speaker, you read an English sentence and you can understand the meaning of it translated by Vietnamese people. Does that help you understand the same Vietnamese text? I mean the structure, grammar and other things. You can get the Buddhism terminology and C2 and it will help you practice and understand Buddhism easily. Thank you very much for your reading.

Vietnamese paragraph: Nếu không có Tăng Bảo thì không bao giờ chúng ta giác ngộ chân lý được, không giác ngộ chân lý thì biết gì mà hộ trì chân lý, chân lý không được hộ trì thì làm sao chứng đạt được chân lý. There are two options, which one is better? 1. Without the Sangha Jewel, we can never realize/comprehend the truth; without realizing the truth, we do not know how to uphold the truth, (if the truth is not upheld, it cannot be attained) (not having been upheld, the truth cannot be attained). 2. Without the Sangha Jewel, we can never realize the truth; without realizing the truth, how could we possibly uphold it; and if the truth is not upheld, how could it ever be attained? Thank your for your reading. Please consider and correct the translation related to Vietnamese Buddhism.

Vietnamese sentences: Thánh tăng, Thánh ni và Thánh cư sĩ còn ăn thịt chúng sinh thì Thánh đó là Thánh gì? Câu hỏi này để tự quý vị suy ngẫm trả lời. English sentences: If Noble Monks, Noble Nuns, and Noble Lay Disciples still consume the flesh of sentient beings, then what kind of Noble person is that? This question is for you yourselves to reflect on and answer. Do you think this is a good translation for our international Buddhists?

I can't use the _Path of Purification_ PDF version of AccessToInsight.org because ... 1. I want to restructure/retranslate Visuddhimagga into english. 2. I want to add the reference link in each word of Visuddhimagga to the source in tipitaka. 3. I want to make the link **directly** to the expected page of Visuddhimagga and make the highlight to the expected text when I answer or make an article. ... so I want the computerised text version, to publish in HTML format on the internet. It requires a very long time to do a new translation of it all, because English is not my native language -- and I require a very long time as well to translate pāli even in my native language -- and so I think it would be faster and more effective to restructure from another's version/translation. Therefore: 1. Is there a free (i.e. [libre](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gratis_versus_libre) or [open](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_source)) version of Visuddhimagga in a computerized text format? 2. Is there a computerised text version of the Budaedu's Visuddhimagga version ? Or can you tell me about obtaining permission (and the data) from a copyright holder? --- I'm principally looking for something like [a license](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/) which allows: - Distribution and - Creating a derivative work ... and a corresponding text format which can be converted to e.g. HTML.

What was that word about a Buddha's concentration? Is not easy to remember, thank you..[So you might remember...

I'm looking to translate into English the name Namkha Chenpo Dewachen Gompa. Any idea of its precise meaning? Thanks a lot!

The Pali term "Arati" is defined in Sutta Central as https://suttacentral.net/define/arati >dislike, discontent, aversion Others translate it differently, however. Thanissaro Bhikkhu, for example, translates it as "resentment." What textual evidence is there from the Pali Suttas, as well as the parallels, that supports one or the other of these translations?

SN38.14 describes three types of duhkha: > “Reverend, there are these three forms of suffering. “Tisso imā, > āvuso, dukkhatā. The suffering inherent in painful feeling; the > suffering inherent in conditions; and the suffering inherent in > perishing. Dukkhadukkhatā, saṅkhāradukkhatā, vipariṇāmadukkhatā—These > are the three forms of suffering.” I have found a few instances that allude to vipariṇāmadukkhatā being the stress associated with being wrong, having wrong view, wrong perception, not knowing, etc. > Thag 21.1 “Your mind is on fire “Saññāya vipariyesā, because of a > perversion of perception. > > an3.117 It’s when someone has right view, an undistorted > perspective, such as: > > AN 10.85 ‘My dear friend, I didn’t lie or speak hollow words. But > I had gone mad, I was out of my mind.’ There are other like usages (see DN33 ). So why is vipariṇāmadukkhatā translated as stress of change or disappearance of happiness - these seem to be within the scope of saṅkhāradukkhatā (impermanence of conditions)? I have not found any usage that resembles the 'stress of change'. can you point it out?

This is a question of practical interest. My personal practice is generally to feel guilty for bad deeds, but today I tried *admitting* fault and guilt without *feeling* guilty, and it was much less stressful. I do not know which is correct. Is there any textual evidence on whether the Buddha suggested feeling remorse or not? ---------- **Sutta 42.8** from the Samyutta Nikaya , *Sankha Sutta*, discusses remorse, but the following two translations seem to contradict each other, in which one mentions remorse is not useful, whereas the other mentions that remorse is part of reflecting on having done something not good. Is one of these translations more historically accurate than the other? ---------- The [Access To Insight](https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn42/sn42.008.than.html) translation reads: > 'The Blessed One > in a variety of ways criticizes & censures the taking of life, and > says, "Abstain from taking life." There are living beings that I have > killed, to a greater or lesser extent. That was not right. That was > not good. But if I become remorseful for that reason, that evil deed > of mine will not be undone.' So, reflecting thus, he abandons right > then the taking of life, and in the future refrains from taking life. ---------- The [Sutta Central](https://suttacentral.net/sn42.8/en/sujato?lang=en&layout=linebyline&reference=none¬es=sidenotes&highlight=false&script=latin) translation reads: > But consider when a Realized One arises in the world… In many ways he > criticizes and denounces killing living creatures… And there’s a > disciple who is devoted to that teacher. Then they reflect: ‘In many > ways the Buddha criticizes and denounces killing living creatures, > saying: “Stop killing living creatures!” But I have killed living > creatures to a certain extent. That’s not right, it’s not good, and I > feel remorseful because of it. But I can’t undo what I have done.’ > Reflecting like this, they give up killing living creatures, and in the > future they don’t kill living creatures. ---------- (I’ve been trying to translate the Pali but I've only gotten so far as that one should "renounce" the evil deed.)

In dependent origination , the word “ viññāṇa” arises and it is translated as consciousness. I am not satisfied and I guess some other members of this site are also not satisfied because then the dependent origination becomes: given volitional formations, consciousness arises. Isn’t volitional formation and ignorance itself due to consciousness? Therefore in order to understand “viññāṇa” I need to understand what is the Sanskrit root for the Pali word “ viññāṇa”? I looked up online Sanskrit dictionary, there is a word “vinn ” which means “understanding “. Do you think “vinn” is the root word for “ viññāṇa” ?

At 2:48 in this video of the acceptance speech, a Tibetan prayer is recited. What is its translation into English? I think it's something like "Gautama, the true Buddha... free from all precept". I once saw a translation in a YouTube comment but have lost it.

Is there buddhajayanti sinhala translation of tipitaka for Kindle device? Pdf format is not good with kindle. Is there any other format of buddhajayanti sinhala tipitaka for kindle. Please let me know..

In Bhikku Bodhi's translations, "without discoverable beginning" suttas end with: > This Samsara is without discoverable beginning. It is enough to be liberated *from them*. Liberated from what, in this context?

From the Six Sets of Six MN 148 . English > Dependent on **the mind and mind objects**, mind-consciousness arises. The meeting of the three is contact; with contact as condition there is feeling; with feeling as condition there is craving. Pali > manañca paṭicca **dhamme** ca uppajjati manoviññāṇaṁ, tiṇṇaṁ saṅgati phasso, phassapaccayā vedanā, vedanāpaccayā taṇhā. Bhante Sujato translates it as "thoughts" > Mind consciousness arises dependent on **the mind and thoughts**. The meeting of the three is contact. Contact is a condition for feeling. Feeling is a condition for craving. But wouldn't mind objects be a superset of thoughts? In addition to thoughts, what else are mind objects? Why did Bhikkhu Bodhi choose "mind object" as his translation?

I am curious about the idea of calling *sila* (all precepts and vows) as ethics. When did this translation appeared? Or who interpreted *sila* as ethics or something similar to ethics? This is not to say that it is incorrect or comprehensive, but ethics as a western category of thought has been used as an auxiliary concept to understand sila. Which scholar/s did this?

Where are the English Translations of Commentary? Have all of them translated in to English?

I've been reading/studying E F Shumacher's *A Guide for the Perplexed*, a philosophical book about the nature of knowledge and our capacity for understanding the world, especially in relation to "higher" and "lower" processes of humanity, (IE, prayer or meditation vs hunger or fear) and I'm hoping a Buddhist perspective can help me to understand one aspect of it better. In it, he refers to self-awareness as the level of human existence that is activated or discovered by mindfulness-meditation, by dismissing the thoughts that come from the level of consciousness. He says that self-awareness produces insights rather than thoughts. Shumacher was a Catholic at the time of writing this, but I understand that he studied and was influenced heavily by Buddhism, and I believe that is where his ideas about thought come from. I am not a Buddhist, though I have tried meditation. An idea that I have struggled with in all of this is the definition of thought. I have always considered the processes by which one would analyze or dismiss a thought to also be thinking. I would consider an insight to be a type of thought, not something higher than a thought. I am now struggling to understand whether I simply have too broad of a definition for thought, or am simply so philosophically-challenged that I have never experienced this process-above-thought discussed by Shumacher and Buddhism. Can you help me understand what the Buddhist definition of a "thought" is? Do you have a different word for the process by which one would dismiss a thought or analyze a thought while meditating? Everything beyond this point is my own speculation on the subject, for clarity or analysis. If you already understand my problem or misunderstanding, feel free to skip it. I have wondered if Freud's ego and super-ego may shed light on this. I would say that "thought" is the word used to describe the processes of both the ego and super-ego, but I wonder if Shumacher and Buddhism would consider "thought" to be what the ego does, and perhaps have a different word for the processes of the super-ego. I have also imagined, as Shumacher does in his book, the human being as a programmer and computer. (The programmer being the self and the computer being the human brain) The human computer carries out all the day-to-day activities we do without higher thought, while the human programmer directs the computer and programs it so that it behaves as desired. In this analogy, I would consider all communication between the "computer" and "programmer" to be thought, but I wonder if Shumacher and Buddhism considers thought to be information passed from the computer to the programmer, while directions passed from the programmer to the computer is something else. I have included the translation tag, as I suspect my answer may largely pivot on the translation of the word "thought" from Buddhist texts into English, and whether there is a more thorough translation of it that could explain this.

At the beginning of his talk, The Vanishing of Greed, Hatred, and Delusion , **Ajahn Viradhammo** reads verses about Nibbana from a translation by Nyanatiloka of a fragment of the Pali Canon, from the Asaṅkhata Saṃyutta I suppose: > This, Oh monks, is called the Unconditioned: the vanishing of greed, hatred, and delusion. This Oh monks, is called the Boundless: the vanishing of greed, hatred, and delusion. This Oh monks, is called Freedom from [?]: the vanishing of greed, hatred, and delusion. This Oh monks, is called the True: ... This Oh monks, is called the Further Shore: ... This Oh monks, is called the Subtle: ... This Oh monks, is called the [?]: ... This Oh monks, is called the Ageless: ... This Oh monks, is called the Permanent: ... This Oh monks, is called the Beyond of All Manifoldness: ... This Oh monks, is called the Peace: ... This Oh monks, is called the Deathless: ... This Oh monks, is called the Sublime: ... This Oh monks, is called the Auspicious: ... This Oh monks, is called the [?]: ... This Oh monks, is called the Wondrous: ... This Oh monks, is called the Sorrowless: ... .. etc... Is anyone aware of such a translation by Nyanatiloka being available on line ? Thank you for having taken the time to read this, your kind and generous help is very much appreciated.

In "The Longer Advice to Rāhula" the following appears: >Muditaṁ, rāhula, bhāvanaṁ bhāvehi. >Muditañhi te, rāhula, bhāvanaṁ bhāvayato yā arati sā pahīyissati. Bhante Sujato translates this as >Meditate on rejoicing. >For when you meditate on rejoicing any discontent will be given up. Thanissaro Bhikkhu: > “Develop the meditation of empathetic joy. For when you are developing the meditation of empathetic joy, resentment will be abandoned. Bhikkhu Vagga: > "Rāhula, develop meditation on altruistic joy; for when you develop meditation on altruistic joy, any discontent will be abandoned. Can somebody please explain which terms correspond to which here, and how the translation is carried out? Thank you