Dear Nina,
The Abhidhamma and Commentaries in the right hands are great teaching aids.
They certainly clarify many difficult points in the Suttas. As you might
notice from my Sutta translation notes, I often refer to them as and when
necessary. I am not an expert in Abhidhamma and admire those who have an
unconditional love for them. Having said that, I must add that I am quite
contented to study the Suttas, resorting to other extra-Sutta texts only as
a last resort.
Might I compare Sutta study itself to the academic Humanities and the
Abhidhamma to the Pure Sciences, in which case I am a Humanities student. Of
course, I would consult the Pure Science professor or student as I have an
interest in the subject, too. Moreover, an interdisciplinary approach helps.
As you say, it is a matter in personal inclination and also, I might add,
the audience one is working for.
It would be really great if an Abhidhamma scholar who is also adept with the
Commentaries (discounting their cultural statements), could do a translation
of the Suttas suitable for the average reading public, and not for
specialists who are already expert in some way (which would be like bringing
robes to Thailand). In many ways, the work of Nyanamoli and Bodhi are very
good examples of this combination of expertise.
Whatever demerit we may find in their translation is, I think, because they
have do work alone. It is difficult for authors and writers to see their own
typos, omissions and errors in a work of this stature. Ideally, we have an
international council of Pali scholars and translators, and English experts
to translate the Suttas. Sadly, most Buddhists (myself included) are often
independent zealots with our own grand vision of what Buddhism is and is
not, should be and should not. But we make our little contributions, or at
least feel we do, and make ourselves happy in this life and as a palliative
against a weird world.
The Pali Yahoo Group, happily, allows us to get out of our tight visionary
skins and share our wisdom and ignorance with others. I hope we can each
show greater goodwill and generosity, for only with these qualities, can
this spiritual work be successful: as a common concerted effort. I am
delighted that people like John Kelly see the merit of the trilinear
translation, and Frank Kuan, providing delightful critique of our work.
Above all, Yong Peng, a personal friend, who provides us with this platform,
has done a most admirable job.
This is where you come in, Nina (if I do not sound too bold). Your expertise
of Abhidhamma (I always hear the intonation of "kusala dhamma, akusala
dhamma" whenever your name is mentioned). I'm sure we welcome relevant notes
(Abhidhamma, Commentaries, etc) that would enhance the clarity of the
translation.
We are all experts in our own right, but we need the expertise of others to
see our own greater unseen expertise. If we live by our own light, we cast a
distinct dark shadow: with the lights of others, we are lightened all
around. Yet we need our own eyes to see.
The next important point I would like to raise is that the translated texts,
no matter how elaborate and how good, are still what they are: texts. Dead
words pointing to a living spirit. They are just guidebooks and signposts;
menus for a great cuisine. There is still a vital need for some connection
with a living spiritual teacher, even a tenuous one. I'm not talking about
gaining credentials through empowerments or having credit-card teachers, but
spiritual resources we have in our lives when we have spiritual questions.
The Garava Sutta (also called Uruvela Sutta II) reveals a very touching
aspect of the Buddha's "personality". While hesitating to teach his newly
found Dharma, the Buddha reflected thus:
"One dwells in suffering if one is without reverence and deference. Now what
ascetic or brahmin can I honour and respect and dwell in dependence on?"
Not finding anyone better than a Buddha, he thought:
"Let me then honour and respect and dwell in dependence on this very Dharma
to which I have fully awakened."
(S 1:139 = A 2:20)
The great difference between a guru and the Buddha is that the former points
to himself while the Buddha points to the way. Let us be like the Buddha;
for there are too many gurus in our world already.
One of the great beauty of studying the Suttas is that they raise spiritual
questions in us. Such spiritual questions goad me to go on questioning
myself: indeed life itself is a series of questions, the final answer coming
with enlightenment. Before that we only "think" we know the answers (with or
without Suttas, Abhidhamma, and Commentaries). Problems usually come from
those who think they have the "final answers" without themselves embodying
those answers, thus telling others that they do not need to find the answers
for themselves.
Why do I translate the Suttas? I take it like good public relations: to
advertise the amazing beauty of the Buddha Dharma. I don't think anyone
would be enlightened reading even the whole Tripitaka in Pali or any
language (or even translating): it might even be ego-boosting if done with
the wrong idea. But when the Dharma is beautifully presented, it might
motivate people to go on to understand practise the Precepts more seriously,
to go on to cultivate their minds or meditate more healthily, and to grow in
wisdom, and to be spiritually free. Above all, I translate because I really
enjoy doing it although few here in Singapore share that joy. But I am
convinced that if I work hard and well, there will be great posthumous joy
(not for me, I mean). I find the meditation on impermanence and death a
great motivator.
I have two lovely young sons (6 & 7) who enjoy the good things children
their age generally enjoy. I almost never on my own initiative tell them
about Buddhism. I do not want them to be conditioned or statistical
Buddhists. By now they know what I am doing, and they are such curious
beings. Their questions are coming in, and as they come in I gently answer
them, rarely elaborately. My main teaching for them is to always ask three
questions: "Why, why, why?" and they have been doing so ad nauseam (actually
on their own, as I have been before them). I remember Ajahn Brahm once
saying in his public talk: if you do not want your children to be converted
by the Christian evangelists, teach them to ask why why why!
I have a feeling Frank Kuan might have some salty remarks over my words,
words, words, here. And that's what builds a friendship: open communication.
Nina, I can sense the wonderful care about which you write, and you have
given us great contributions from your store of Abhidhamma and Atthakatha
expertise, despite your uncharacteristic self-effacement which you must have
picked up in Thailand.
We await and welcome your contributions and delight in your presence here.
Sukhi.
P.
----- Original Message -----
From: "nina van gorkom" <nilo@...>
To: <Pali@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, February 05, 2003 2:14 AM
Subject: Re: [Pali] Pali Conventions
> 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.
>
>
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> Yahoo! Groups members can set their delivery options to daily digest or
web only.
> [Homepage] http://www.tipitaka.net
> [Send Message] pali@yahoogroups.com
> [Mailing List] http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pali
> [Discussion] http://tipitaka.suddenlaunch.com
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>