Dave,

Lopez's article is interesting. He is one of those academic scholars who are
also practitioners. In 2000 ,Makransky et al published "Buddhist Theology"
which
is a watershed book where some scholars basically declared that they are
both
academics as well as practitioners, and the advantages in doing so.

This is a formidable versaility for those who want to master the letter as
well as
the spirit of the Dharma. Which should put us fundamentalists and purists to
shame,
leave us barking in our manger. I think if we are willing to learn any
situation, it
would be a great advantage to Buddhism or the Dharma, and to ourselves.

The issue of the correct translation of *ariya,sacca* has been discussed by
a few
scholars like KR Norman (whose 80-year festschrift is just out). I've
received the
advertisement, but not the price of the book (despite my request).

Anyway, some scholars think that ariya,sacca should be translated as "the
truth of
the ariyas" rather than say "ariyan truth" or "noble truth". Actually, I
have no problem
relating "noble" to "truth"; for example, we say "great book" if I love a
book. Can a book
in itself be great? Of course not, but it makes me feel great. So it is a
"great book."

Similarly, "noble truth" is a truth that ennobles us. I think people like
Thanissaro Bhikkhu
translate it just that "ennobling truth," technically correct, I'm sure.
Frankly, I find no
problem sticking of "noble truth", for when I see the word my mind tells me:
"truth of the ariyas"
"truth of the noble ones"
"ennobling virtue", and most importantly.
"the truth that makes me a noble person'
or "the truth that I best understand as a noble saint on the path".
Can we put all these meanings in any one very brief translation?

It takes a great man to define words and terms, but it is the simple man who
understands
them for what they really mean. Roman Catholicism is founded on exact
terminology:
on ex opere operato, transubstantiation, monstrance, and in principe, all of
which are
advantageous to their missionary's position.

The great success of early Buddhism is that it is easy and "cool" with
words. The Buddha
uses word without being attached to them, but what the audience will
understand in a
life-changing way.

Strange, no one has ever said that Pali can never be translated into any
other language,
especially English. Which brings to me a grave concern I have: I think we
should stop
speaking English here, and start using Pali. After all this is a Pali
website. (Now did the
Buddha ever speak Pali?) I'm 100% sure he spoke Singlish, "Singaporean
English). No
one has proven me wrong so far. (What is stated in this paragraph is not
true.)

Please smile and radiate metta after reading the above; if not, I apologise.

With metta and mudita esp to those who think differently or avoid
eye-contact with others,

Piya Tan

On Jan 25, 2008 12:08 AM, dkotschessa <dkotschessa@...> wrote:

>
> Interesting article from tricycle.com. I do not think it is one you
> have to sign up to read, as I'm not signed in now, and I'm reading
> it...
>
> http://www.tricycle.com/issues/from_archive/4152-1.html
>
>
>



--
The Minding Centre
Blk 644 Bukit Batok Central #01-68 (2nd flr)
Singapore 650644
Website: dharmafarer.googlepages.com


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