Dear Jeff,

I just saw your message for the first time today.

> Are translations that bad?

Some are, some aren't. The Bodhi/Nanamoli translations (such as of the Majjhimanikaaya) are excellent.

>Wouldn't it make more sense to
>just look up questionable words in the dictionary? Often authors will
>give you the Pali or Sanskrit word for you to look up.

The dictionaries don't always have the last word on the matter. It can be useful to look at how a word is used in many contexts to get a better idea of its usage than what you'll find in, for example, the PED. The CPD and Cone's dictionary are better, but they've only gotten through about a third of the alphabet. Often you'll look a word up in the dictionary only to find that the example cited is the very spot, in the very text, that you're reading. How do you know for sure that the lexicographer understands it better than you do?

>
>Also I've noticed that while learning this language is interesting, it
>is also distracting. My meditation could be more focused if I didn't
>have this distraction.

This is a tradeoff many people have noticed. It depends entirely on your goals and interests.

>I will continue studying if I can find a
>reason/meaning.
>

For me I enjoy being able to read the Buddha's dialogues and sermons in something close to the original idiom. It's like with all languages, there's a flavour to the original that doesn't come through in translation. If that sort of thing attracts you, then it could be a reason to spend time on study.

best regards,

/Rett