Re: sn 1.34

Dear Vojislav,

Yes I think the reading does capture the sense of it, although I am sure there are other ways of translating it. 

For example:

Punctuation: 

Remember that gāthās like this were originally transmitted orally and then written down in the first century BCE in Sri Lanka. So "punctuation" as we understand it did not exist, except by pauses in the recitation, and even when it was written down, it is unlikely that punctuation marks were used for many centuries, based on their absence in the coeval epigraphic record from India and Sri Lankan. Punctuation is therefore to be determined according to the context; case relation is far more important. The PTS edition for example, (based on one Burmese, three Singhalese and one Siamese manuscript), has no punctuation in it (except a period at the end of the fourth line after ti), while the version you are quoting from is the Burmese which has added commas and periods. 

Hope that helps,

Bryan