Dhammapada verse 279

[Truth_Seeker1989]

Dear Dhammanando,

Is Nibbana/Nirvana non-substantial? I ask because of the below quote.

"His release, being founded on truth, does not fluctuate, for whatever is deceptive is false; Unbinding — the undeceptive — is true. Thus a monk so endowed is endowed with the highest determination for truth, for this — Unbinding, the undeceptive — is the highest noble truth."

MN 140

[Dhammanando]

it's the non-substantial that looks needlessly interpretive to me.

I would say that this part is the translation's only redeeming feature. The rendering 'non-substantial' suggest that Wallis is among those few Pali translators who are alert to the semantic distinction between the adjective 'anatta' (as used here) and agglutinated predicative phrase 'anatta'. Most other translators get the two homonyms muddled and when encountering the adjective will translate it as they would the phrase (i.e., as "is/are not self").

Sorry, what I wrote above was nonsense. I don't know what I was thinking but I got it completely the wrong way round. Dhp. 279 is in fact the phrasal anatta, not the adjectival one. So the Wallis translation doesn't in fact have the redeeming feature I imagined it to.

Fancy making such a mistake on the Buddha's birthday!