RE: Dipavamsa passage

"when one says "disowning originality" in English, my first thought is that they gave up being fresh and unusual, whereas what actually happened is the opposite,"

Can you elaborate and explain the above statement, especially the bit "what actually happened is the opposite" in particular?

---In palistudy@yahoogroups.com, <bryan.levman@...> wrote:

Dear Suan,

Thanks for the translation which I think is good.

"Disowning originality" is not a good choice in English as the word "originality" can mean "preceding all others in time, i. e. first" but it can also mean "not derived from something else, fresh and unusal;" (American Heritage Dictionary). You mean I think "their original nature or state" here (pakatibhāvaṃ) so something that makes that clear would work better; when one says "disowning originality" in English, my first thought is that they gave up being fresh and unusual, whereas what actually happened is the opposite,

Bryan

On Friday, November 22, 2013 8:26:01 PM, Saccassa Esako <bhutavadi@...> wrote:

Suvatthi!

How about this, based on the Kathāvatthu Mūlaţīkā passage:

Giving up the original state [of] name, attire, requisites, deportment and duties, they made otherwise.

Dhammagaaravena,
Esako

On 22 Nov 2013 22:31, <suanluzaw@...> wrote:

Dear Venerable Nyanatusita

(and greetings to Petra Kieffer Pulz, Jim, Lance, and Nina as well)

How are you?

You wrote the following:

“Perhaps someone can help with translating an obscure passage in the Dipavamsa, which I need for an article I am working on.

Nāmam liňgam parikkhāram ākappakaraņāni ca, pakatibhāvam jahitvā tañca aññam akamsu te.”

I have edited the above Dīpavamsa verse portion and will offer a translation in light of the following Kathāvatthu Mūlaţīkā passage.

“Nāmanti yam buddhādipaţisamyuttam na hoti mañjusirīti-ādikam, tam nikāyanāmam. Liňganti nivāsanapārupanādivisesakatam saņţhānavisesam. Sikkādikam parikkhāram.

Ākappo ţhānādīsu aňgaţţhapanaviseso daţţhabbo. Karaņanti cīvarasibbanādikiccaviseso.”

Please allow me to translate first how the Kathāvatthu Mūlaţīkā comments on those terms in the Dīpavamsa verse.

“‘Nāmam’ refers to such a sectarian name as ‘Manjusirī’ which is not related to the Buddha and his disciples. ‘Liňgam’ refers to the unique looks such as the costumes specially made and how they were worn. Extra requisites (more than recommended eight) such as a yoke for carrying things are made. Ākappo should be noted as unique deportment or distinctive body positioning in standing and so on. ‘Karaņam’ refers to such special tasks as stitching robes and the like.”

Now, here comes a simpler translation of the Dīpavamsa verse portion.

“Nāmam liňgam parikkhāram ākappakaraņāni ca, pakatibhāvam jahitvā tañca aññam akamsu te.”

“Disowning originality, they altered the sectarian name, the guise, the requisite, the deportment, and the chore.”

What do you think?

Suan Lu Zaw

http://bodhibeda.com

---In palistudy@yahoogroups.com, <nyanatusita@...> wrote:

Dear All,

Perhaps someone can help with translating an obscure passage in the Dīpavaṃsa, which I need for an article I am working on.

Nāmaṃ liṅgaṃ parikkhāraṃ ākappakaraṇīyāni ca, / pakatibhāvaṃ jahitvā tañca aññaṃ akaṃsu te. = Geiger, 5.38, 44, 50; SL edition (on GRETIL) verse 77, 83, 89.

This was translated by Oldenberg in 1879 as:

“Forsaking the original rules regarding nouns, genders, compositions, and the embellishments of style, they changed all that.”

The context is a description of the changes that the Mahasamghikas and other schools made to their canons and texts.

< snip >

Remarkably, there is no English translation of the Dipavamsa other than Oldenberg's 135 year old translation.

Best wishes,
Bh Nyanatusita