Dear Dave,

"wouldn't "gahapati-putta.m" mean householder's son rather than young
householder..."

I agree with you. The Pali word for a young man is maanava or maanavaka.

I think this error is most probably caused not because the translator didn't know the meaning. I think he elsewhere gives the meaning as householder's son. So what I surmise is that he did it in order to translate it to "idiomatic English".

But I think it is a grave error in translating ancient text to a modern language. Words have a meaning only within a context. And that cannot be reproduced today, especially in a different tongue.

Take this example, gahapati, is a generic term by the Buddha to indicate what we might call head of a household, not even a householder. Gahapatiputta really seem to distinguish between a monks and lay people. It really means only that he is a lay person who is not a head of a household. It is same as 'gihii'. In any case, there is no way to bring the word 'young'; puttas also become old!!!

These are some of my thoughts. I think the solution is to use an agreed term. See Ara.na Vibhanga sutta.

With mettaa,


D. G. D. C. Wijeratna



____________________________________________________________________________________
Pinpoint customers who are looking for what you sell.
http://searchmarketing.yahoo.com/

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]