Pali is not a " dead language " . Pali was and is to all extents and purposes an artificially constructed literary language , which was possibly never spoken outside of its own context, and which evolved precisely because none of the lingua franca past or present could convey the subtleties that were in need of expression and which yields its meaning only to those who go to it with the right mindset. It was ever thus. It was true for ancient Thais and Burmese. It was true for Sri Lankans . There was no place where Pali was spoken as the language of the market place. It evolved for a specific purpose and to attempt to bypass that is to lose sight of that purpose.Jhana4 wrote:TMingyur wrote:From another thread:
TMingyur wrote:As to the Upanisa Sutta I noticed that where Thanissaro B. has "disenchantment" B. Bodhi has "revulsion". This difference in translation seem to pervade all their sutta translations.
The connotations of some alternate word choices for translations seem to foster what is reminiscent of a puritan orthodoxy to me. "Revulsion" vs "disenchantment" is one example. "Defilements" vs "hindrances" is another. Why an American born in modern times would want to risk encouraging such a puritanish orthodoxish mentality is a mystery.
To give Bhikku Bodhi the benefit of the doubt, he simply may be picking the words that are most technically correct by his view. I don't know Pali. I wonder though if anyone does. Pali is a dead language. Students depend on teachers to convey the words and the connotations to them. Mistakes and misunderstands likely happened over 2000 years passing down that knowledge. There is no place where people still speak Pali to go and check and if there was that wouldn't mean that a "modern Pali" would use words in the same ways as an ancient Pali.
An accurate translation of the Pali Canon may be something forever beyond our reach.
It does not yield itself to those who would drag IT into THEIR world view even if they have the extraordinary good fortune to be modern Americans...Pali is not Iraq. The Dhamma is not understood by using in as a vehicle to reject or subvert ones own cultural conditioning merely.
Personally I find homilies from those whose half digested ideas about Dhamma reveal themselves at every turn a valuable lesson in Kshanti...As one who after nearly forty years is still chewing..
"Oh" as the poet Burns has it " for the gift to see ourselves as others see us".
No amount of spin will alter the fact the Buddha saw as a prerequisite of understanding his dhamma a degree of turning away from life as conventionally lived. And turning away with some urgency. Buddha Dhamma is not a series of positive affirmations. It should and does lead to a greater degree of happiness, but that happiness comes at a cost. And the cost is a degree of disillusionment with and rejection of the kama, passing world . And if that rankles then we need to ask ourselves if we are in the right place.