Big new Sutra translated

[Nicholas Weeks]

SN 36.21 as well.

I'll try to find some time later, but I really seems like an amalgam of encounters from wanderers around Rājagaha. Totally out on limb - it's just a theory at this point.

The translators Introduction is chock full of scholarly connections and stuff.

[SDC]

SN 36.21 as well.

I'll try to find some time later, but I really seems like an amalgam of encounters from wanderers around Rājagaha. Totally out on limb - it's just a theory at this point.

The translators Introduction is chock full of scholarly connections and stuff.

Wow that is quite a bit of information there. Seems like this translation is a lot smashed into one place.

[dharmacorps]

Seems like this translation is a lot smashed into one place.

I thought this too. But besides the variations in translation, the basic phrasing and many of the terms don't fit with the pali canon very well (qualitative I know). Perhaps the author tried to make parts of it sound like it was from the canon though.

[SDC]

Seems like this translation is a lot smashed into one place.

I thought this too. But besides the variations in translation, the basic phrasing and many of the terms don't fit with the pali canon very well (qualitative I know). Perhaps the author tried to make parts of it sound like it was from the canon though.

Yeah hard to say. I'm not versed enough in philology to get super technical, let alone what the translator dealt with from the source language.

Nevertheless, I think it is always safe to assume that at the core of any work having both a doctrine and a central figure, there is always an attempt to synchronize with some notion of the origins of what is being described, even in cases of radical reinterpretation of that notion; the goal is always to be close to heart of any matter and describe in an accurate and useful way. Seems as though whoever originally compiled this text was trying to put together a bunch of stories that have northern India as their source.

[retrofuturist]

Greetings,

That sounds like you didn't look at the second part.

Aside from being called Mindfulness Of A Body and including a list of body parts, that's alien too.

Metta,
Paul.

[dharmacorps]

Nevertheless, I think it is always safe to assume that at the core of any work having both a doctrine and a central figure, there is always an attempt to synchronize with some notion of the origins of what is being described, even in cases of radical reinterpretation of that notion; the goal is always to be close to heart of any matter and describe in an accurate and useful way.

Yeah for sure. Even the Mahayana sutras which refer to pali canon suttas and have the Buddha or someone else saying "that previous thing in this sutta is wrong" are an effort to harmonize teachings. Although in the process, at least to me, it discredits the "new" material.

[SDC]

Nevertheless, I think it is always safe to assume that at the core of any work having both a doctrine and a central figure, there is always an attempt to synchronize with some notion of the origins of what is being described, even in cases of radical reinterpretation of that notion; the goal is always to be close to heart of any matter and describe in an accurate and useful way.

Yeah for sure. Even the Mahayana sutras which refer to pali canon suttas and have the Buddha or someone else saying "that previous thing in this sutta is wrong" are an effort to harmonize teachings. Although in the process, at least to me, it discredits the "new" material.

Surely takes on the stigma of being "suspect", which is why it is essential that all previous standards remain intact for those who are interested in understanding the basis of any message.

My goodness, we've been on this forum for years rogether and barely exchanged a word. This is great.

[Kim OHara]

Greetings,

That sounds like you didn't look at the second part.

Aside from being called Mindfulness Of A Body and including a list of body parts, that's alien too.

Metta,
Paul.

Alien in what way?
You dismissed the whole thing because it...

...Doesn't read like any Pali Sutta I've ever read... far too flowery and all over the place.

... and the language in the section I quoted doesn't fit that description.


Kim

[retrofuturist]

Greetings Kim,

Alien in what way?

That the instructions, rationale and descriptions do not correlate to those in the Pali suttas. If one has made a deliberate effort to focus on the suttas, to the exclusion of extraneous works, then this is more likely to appear obvious. Those with a more syncretic approach are less likely to discern this.

You dismissed the whole thing because it...

Disregard would be a better way to describe it... and not so much so because it's "far too flowery and all over the place", which it is, but because there's enough in the Sutta Pitaka to go on with than to obsess over curious works of dubious origin.

Metta,
Paul.

[dharmacorps]

My goodness, we've been on this forum for years rogether and barely exchanged a word. This is great.

oh my goodness that is true. How did that happen?

Disregard would be a better way to describe it... and not so much so because it's "far too flowery and all over the place", which it is, but because there's enough in the Sutta Pitaka to go on with than to obsess over curious works of dubious origin.

I feel this way too. There is so much in the canon that is internally consistent I have grown to trust it as a coherent teaching pointing one way. Ask me again in another couple decades but I feel there is plenty to explore there for a lifetime. My early efforts at a syncretic approach to all Buddhist texts led me to total befuddlement. Not a judgement of others, just my personal experience.

[Kim OHara]

...

Disregard would be a better way to describe it... and not so much so because it's "far too flowery and all over the place", which it is, but because there's enough in the Sutta Pitaka to go on with than to obsess over curious works of dubious origin.

I feel this way too. There is so much in the canon that is internally consistent I have grown to trust it as a coherent teaching pointing one way. Ask me again in another couple decades but I feel there is plenty to explore there for a lifetime. My early efforts at a syncretic approach to all Buddhist texts led me to total befuddlement. Not a judgement of others, just my personal experience.

Retro is correct, for once, in his description of me - I do indeed have "a more syncretic approach". I'm glad you're not judging me for it, but I thought I might explain my approach a little more since we are in the "Connections to Other Paths" section and I make those connections all the time and don't get befuddled.
Essentially, I treat the dhamma as a 'field of study' akin to physics or medicine, which means that I see it as an ongoing project to which many people have contributed, with some giants amongst them commanding more respect than the rest and some expressing their ideas in more (or less) poetic language, while others claim more credit or authority than they really deserve.
So ... the Pali canon is my foundation and reference point, but Mahayana (of all schools) and Theravada are equally entitled to claim a direct line of descent from it, and all have come up with useful and beautiful ideas which I happily adopt when they come my way.
And as an isolated practitioner, I never have to worry that my practice doesn't align with my local temple / meditation group / coven.
If that helps anyone, great. If not, that's fine too.

In the case of this 'new' sutra, I don't find much value in lists of gods and demons, or heavens and hells, but I will come back the the other section to see what it says.


Kim

[johnsmitty]

The poetic parts have some good verses in there. Its also interesting that chapter 1 is some kind of vinaya commentary.