Dear John and friends,

thanks. I support the idea that 'bhikkhu' be left untranslated if a
person is not happy with 'monk' and cannot find anything more
suitable. In fact, the words 'bhikkhu, bhikkhuni, samanera, samaneri,
sikkhamana, upasaka and upasika' are not translated in Chinese
Sutras. I am quite happy with 'monk' though, but I agree the word has
many other connotations in the English usage.

As for the "expanded" meaning of 'bhikkhu' in Dhammapada, I wonder
what the commentaries say. I understand you write with the best
intentions, but I have a different interpretation. The following is
my personal opinion.

I do not think that in the Bhikkhuvagga (chapter 25) of the
Dhammapada, the Buddha is using the term bhikkhu for laypeople. He is
simply making a contrast for the expectations of a bhikkhu (his
ordained disciple). Similar things can be said of a brahman. For
example, a brahman is always a brahman, no matter how bad he is, you
can't 'sack' a brahman. The reverse applies for a non-brahman.
However, as the Buddha would say, a person should not be called a
brahman, to enjoy the benefits and priviledges of being one, just by
birth, but by his conduct. This is, in a way, an indication of the
Buddha's opposition of any caste system, in any form. Still, the
Buddha stopped short of championing for its abolition. It is very
oriental, but it's uniquely Buddhist, within it we find the teaching
of "seeking a balance".

Along the same line, the Buddha says in the Bhikkhuvagga what
qualifies a 'bhikkhu'. In addition to abandoning the family life,
putting on the saffron robes, adhering to hundreds of precepts, a
bhikkhu should be such and such to be really a bhikkhu. On the other
hand, a person of such and such is worthy to be bhikkhu if he is not
yet one.

It is not that suddenly everyone can be a brahman (when not born as
one) or a bhikkhu (when not ordained as one). Of course, the idea of
becoming a brahman is no longer appealing in modern society, unless
you are a chauvinist or an /apartheidist/. The prospect of becoming a
bhikkhu is still appealing to many today, but one still has to shave
his head, take up the precepts and put on the robes.


metta,
Yong Peng.

--- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, John Kelly wrote:

The one thing I disagree on is "monk" being the best translation.
That has too many other connotations in English usage. I think now
that leaving it untranslated is best of all, and in fact that's what
Bhikkhu Bodhi does in all his modern translations - "Connected
Discourses of the Buddha", "In the Buddha's Words". And another
reason I like it is that bhikkhu can very often be expanded in
meaning in the suttas to mean any serious Buddhist practitioner (lay
or monastic), just as the Buddha expands the meanings of ariyan,
brahman, samana, etc. E.g., see chapter 25 (Bhikkhu vagga) of the
Dhammapada.