Dear Jason,

thank you for your message. Allow me to point out that Buddhism is not a religious tradition about the absolute purity and correctness of a particular language. In fact, Buddhists accept that the Buddha taught in the local tongue(s) of his audience(s), using words within the context of the listeners. This is also evident in even the earliest textual records of the Buddha's teachings. In addition, Pali is considered a vernacular, and not the purist form of Sanskrit used by brahmin priests. I have also previously shown that Sanskrit has long been replaced by Hindi, Tamil and a host of other languages to be used in modern-day India.

It is not exactly necessary to read Pali to understand the Buddha's teachings. I agree with you about retaining the repetitions of the Pali in translations. I have never needed to publish (commercially) my translations, hence I also cannot comprehend the omission of the repetitions. Otherwise, many of the English translations available today are by well-respected monks. However, maintaining the public interest in Pali helps preserved the Pali texts, as has been done over the centuries in South and Southeast Asia, as compared to East Asia, where original manuscripts were replaced by translations and are no longer extant. So, be it Pali or translations, they each has their functions and usefulness.

metta,
Yong Peng.

--- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, Jason Brien wrote:

I am currently searching for an acceptable English version of the Digha Nikaya and the Majjhima Nikaya, both within the Sutta Pitaka. I've located a couple of translations via amazon.com but the reviews are rather lacklustre, and the academically-oriented reviewers have said that key elements have been removed by the translators in an unacceptable fashion. (Specifically, the repetition of specific teachings over and over again -- such repetition is a natural part of the canon literature.)