Re: atypical vitakka in Mil 116?

Dear Professor Cousins,

I thank you so much for your comments and suggestion, precious indeed.

with every good wish
EC

2011/7/9 L.S. Cousins <selwyn@...>

> **
>
>
> Here it is part of a set of eight things. Each of them is something
> under whose influence Vessantara's mind does not operate. They are
> contrasted with generosity. His mind does operate under the influence of
> generosity. Since the eight things include greed, hate, delusion, pride
> and views, each of which is a character-type, I assume that vitakka here
> is being used in the same way as when it is a character-type: a
> propensity to think about things too much in a disordered way. One might
> also think of sensual, hostile and cruel thoughts.
>
> Lance Cousins
>
>
> On 09/07/2011 16:59, Eugen Ciurtin wrote:
> > In *Mil* 116, in an eightfold apophatic listing of Vessantara's
> qualities,
> > Nagasena says he is without *vitakka*, and the occurrence is clearly
> > distinct from the more typical discussion in e.g. *Mil* 63. As no mention
> of
> > *vicara* is made here, the alternatives are perhaps a bit less strict
> than
> > is the case with the famous meditational pairing, most helpfully
> overviewed
> > by Prof Cousins in *IIJ* 1992 = FS 1 K.R. Norman. Despite this guidance,
> I
> > don't know how to render *vitakka* in this very passage.
> >
> > The text reads *na vitakkavasena* (*pavattati*). Checking the
> translations,
> > we found rather unsatisfactorily renderings: 'disputation' in Rhys Davids
> > (1890: 1.173, 'his heart not turned in the way of' etc.) and
> 'raisonnement'
> > in Nolot (1995: 111; 'la pensée n'était mue ni par etc.''), but 'je reste
>
> > sur ma faim' as there are no further comments. A similar situation is met
> in
> > the modern *Mil-a* edited by Prof Deshpande, in *DOP*& in *CPD* (if I am
> > not mistaken; I was able to check neither Prof Jaini's *tika*, nor Dr
> > Ferreiro-Jardim's 2006 unpublished Australian paper). Horner (1969: 1.162
> *
> > cum* n. 2) has 'way of thought', rightfully adding 'a very difficult word
> to
> > translate' (for 'not that it [scil. the mind] proceeded'). Paribok's
> Russian
> > *Mil* and Osier's recent French *Vess* translations offer, again, no
> clue.
> > Note *vitakka* described with *pavattati* in Cousins 1992: 157 n. 82.
> >
> > This seems to be a little bit puzzling: is this to be taken *prima facie*
> as
> > e.g. 'initial thought', with Horner and Prof Gethin's thesis (1992/2001
> > passim)? Or perhaps the most context-sensitive translation is still the
> > first English one, however far from a proper substantiation (perhaps
> > *citta*cannot be taken here in the sense of
> > *hadaya,* as in many a non-Buddhist Indian setting; see Sugunasiri,
> > *PhEW*1995: 409-430), and looking like a wild guess?
> >
> > Would you be so kind as to offer an alternative hint for translation?
> Please
> > excuse the lack of diacritics.
>
> 
>



--
--
Dr E. Ciurtin
Secretary of the Romanian Association for the History of Religions
http://ihr-acad.academia.edu/EugenCiurtin

Publications Officer of the European Association for the Study of Religions
www.easr.eu

Lecturer & Secretary of the Scientific Council
Institute for the History of Religions, Romanian Academy
Calea 13 Septembrie no. 13 sect. 5, Bucharest 050711
Phone: +40 733 951 953 or +40 721 877 659
www.ihr-acad.ro


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