From: abhidhammika@...
Message: 438
Date: 2001-09-01
--- In Pali@..., "Flavio Costa" <flavio@...> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I'm translating a passage about rebirth from the Milindapanha (more
exactly
> Addhaanavaggo I: Dhammasantatipa~nho), that says:
>
> tena na ca so, na ca a~n~no, purimavi~n~naa.ne pacchimavi~n~naa.na.m
> sa.ngaha.m gacchatii"ti
>
> I. B. Horner translates this passage as following:
>
> consequently neither the one [dhamma] nor another is reckoned as
the last
> consciousness
>
> My doubt is about rendering "purimavi~n~naa.ne
pacchimavi~n~naa.na.m" as
> "the last consciousness". Wouldn't it rather be translated as
something
> like:
>
> consequently, neither the one [dhamma], nor another, it is reckoned
[just]
> as the former and the latest consciousness
>
> This way, it would mean that the flow of phenomena
(dhammasantati) is
> not to be regarded as the same or an entirely different object
moving
> through time, but an effect of two moments of consciousness
artificially
> linked by the mind.
>
> Maybe my doubt here is due to misunderstanding about the role
> vi~n~naa.na is playing on this context, so any clarifications are
welcome.
>
> Thank you,
>
> Flavio Costa