Dear Yong Peng,

While I understand that you would like the English to reflect the Pali
ablative as closely as possible, it is not appropriate in this case.
As has been pointed out, the 2nd and 3rd translations you offered make
no sense at all in English. One regards something AS something else.

There are many other examples of translating one language to another,
where the case or grammatical construction has to be altered to make
sense in the language one is translating into. I just can't think of
them right now.

With metta, John

--- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, "Ong Yong Peng" <yongpeng.ong@...> wrote:
>
> Dear Nina, Ole, Stephen and friends,
>
> I am only trying to retain the ablative in the English, so that the
> English is as close to the Pali as possible. I wonder if there is a
> way we can achieve it.
>
>
> Thanks to Nina for the enlightening explanation how anicca, dukkha
> and anatta are presented here, in a different way. Also,
>
> sa`nkhaara: conditioned phenomenon
> dhamma: reality
>
> As for a.t.thaana, I think PTS refers to anavakaasa when saying
> impossible or not a chance. If you read the text carefully, it is a
> double negation. I do not have PTS with me now, but I think it simply
> resolves it and give it to the readers.
>
> For example,
>
> A.t.thaanameta.m, bhikkhave, anavakaaso ya.m di.t.thisampanno puggalo
> ka~nci sa`nkhaara.m niccato upagaccheyya.
>
> This is NOT the position, monks, it is impossible that a person
> endowed with right views should regard any conditioned phenomenon as
> NOT permanent.
>
> [a.t.thanna and niccata provide the double negation]
>
> I am guessing that PTS has something similar to metta.net like this:
>
> Monks, it is impossible that a person endowed with right views should
> regard any conditioned phenomenon as permanent.
>
> [taking out a.t.thanna and changing niccata to nicca resolves the
> double negation]
>
> What do you think?
>
>
> metta,
> Yong Peng.
>
>
>
> --- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote:
>
> Sa.nkhaara has different meanings depending on the context.
> San.khaara dhammas are dhammas, phenomena, that are conditioned.
> This, I think is the meaning here in this text. We have to think of
> the saying: all conditioned phenomena are impermanent, dukkha, and
> all dhammas are anattaa (including nibbaana).
>
> Sa.nkhaarakkhanahda are all cetasikas except feeling and saññaa.
> Further, there are still other meanings.
>
> > 1. "A.t.thaanameta.m, bhikkhave, anavakaaso ya.m di.t.thisampanno
> > puggalo ka~nci sa`nkhaara.m niccato upagaccheyya.
> > "This is not the standpoint, monks: there is not a chance that,
> > endowed with right views, a person should consider any determination
> > as permanent.
>
> N: Another option: PTS has; it is impossible, it cannot come to pass.
> Standpoint is difficult to fit in here, I think.
>
> instead of determination (for sa.nkhaara): phenomenon.
>
> > 3. "A.t.thaanameta.m, bhikkhave, anavakaaso ya.m di.t.thisampanno
> > puggalo ka~nci dhamma.m attato upagaccheyya.
> > "This is not the standpoint, monks: there is not a chance that,
> > endowed with right views, a person should consider anything as his
> > own.
>
> N: should consider any reality (dhamma) as the self. attato is the
> ablative of attaa, self. The wrong view of self. This in paralel to
> niccaa, sukha.
>