Dear Ardavarz,
You remarks are useful.
-----------
Ardavarz:

> Maybe this is not so important, but I think it could be worth
> sharing. Sometimes ago I noticed that in this passage the word
> dukkha is agreed in gender, therefore it is rather adjective than
> substantive (as a substantive dukkha.m - "pain, suffering" is
> neuter), so maybe the literal translation would be "old age is
> painful, sickness is painful..." etc. which however does not change
> the meaning too much.

--------
N: Yes, I noticed this only recently when I rendered this word by
word. I had not seen it before. I mostly followed the translation by
John Kelly (a few exceptions). To be more precise it should be
painful, as you say. We are so used to hearing: it is dukkha, it is
suffering. Now, I do not like very much the word painful, actually I
feel that there is not any translation which is very satisfying to
render dukkha. I would prefer to leave it untranslated.
---------

> A: I also think that two terms piya and appiya are also neuter
> (although in plural the gender is not explicit) with more abstract
> and impersonal meaning - dear and not-dear things or rather
> pleasant and unpleasant experiences. Still I don't know what the
> commentaries say about this.

-------
N: I studied the words piya ruupa and sata ruupa as used in the
Vibhanga and the Yamaka. At first I thought that it only referred to
ruupa and then found out that it refers to naama as well. Any naama
or ruupa, except lokuttara dhammas.
See Vibhanga, Book of Analysis, The Truth of the Cause. They are all
enumerated.

I think here it refers to whatever is dear or not dear, including
persons or things. We have sorrow when we are separated from dear
persons or pleasant objects. It must include all kinds of objects.
------
Nina.



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