op 03-02-2003 15:10 schreef Piya Tan op libris@...:

So it would be great if we get

> more critiques and ideas from people.

Dear Piya Tan,
I shall go to this site, but meanwhile just a few remarks. I think guiding
principles will influence one's translation. Some take as principle the
litterary aspect and consider by style and idiom what is ancient and what is
from later time. They are not inclined to the Abhidhamma nor to the
commentaries. Whereas others find that in order to understand the meaning of
the texts it is necessary to consider the whole Tipitaka: Vinaya, Suttanta
and Abhidhamma, as well as the commentaries which are based on the Theravada
tradition. Thus, a sutta could be considered in a much wider context and one
could carefully compare different texts.
An example is the Raahulovaada sutta. The Co mentions that for the
understanding of what the Buddha said to Rahula about rupa, one should go to
the Discourse on the Elephant's Footprint and the Vis. Khandha Niddesa. Here
is explained what is included in rupakkhandha: all physical phenomena,
inside the body or outside. This will influence one's transl of the word
rupa: it is part of rupakkhandha. It could be translated as matter or
materiality. Matter may be a loaded term, associated with science, and thus
there are always many problems to find the right word. When rupa is
translated as form I do not mind it, because I know the Pali term and its
meaning. Actually, form could imply: what can be seen, thus, ruupaaramma.na,
visible object. This is only one of the many rupas contained in
rupakkhandha, but all rupas are implied in rupakkhandha. Now this is an
example how translation can be influenced by one's ideas about the sources.
Further on in the Sutta I shall come across another example, but I shall
wait until we are there.
Different translations can also influence one's practice: is jhana necessary
to attain enlightenment or not? On dsg list we discussed the Susima sutta
with different transl: one by AtI and one by Ven. Bodhi. Ven. Bodhi gave
notes of the commentary which made it clear that enlightenment can be
attained without first cultivating jhana, whereas ATI, Ven. Thanissaro
added a personal note that jhana is necessary. Hereby I do not imply that
one should be guided by only one sutta. We see that inclinations to
different kinds of practice influences people's translations.
When people read the Satipatthana sutta or the Anapanasati sutta with or
without the commentaries, this will also make a great difference: they may
also reach diverse conclusions as to the practice. This certainly will
influence their translations.
Here are just some random thoughts I have,
Nina.