ven sujato's 'choices'

[mjaviem]

...
However, most of the time Bhikkhu Bodhi, Bhikkhu Sujato, and Thanissaro Bhikkhu are quite consistent, so if you see "stress" in a TB translation you know it's dukkha, and so on...

I'll give you an example of the contrary: "loke abhijjhādomanassaṁ".

Bhikkhu Bodhi sometimes translate it as "covetousness and displeasure in regard to the world" and sometimes as "longing and dejection in regard to the world". It could be my flawed english understanding but to me both interpretations have different meanings*.

Here some random suttas to check this translations of the same Pali words by the same reputable translator and subject to his own interpretation.

...
“Here, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu dwells contemplating the body in the body, ardent, clearly comprehending, mindful, having removed covetousness and displeasure in regard to the world. He dwells contemplating feelings in feelings, ardent, clearly comprehending, mindful, having removed covetousness and displeasure in regard to the world. He dwells contemplating mind in mind, ardent, clearly comprehending, mindful, having removed covetousness and displeasure in regard to the world. He dwells contemplating phenomena in phenomena, ardent, clearly comprehending, mindful, having removed covetousness and displeasure in regard to the world.
...

“Bhikkhus, for direct knowledge of lust, four things are to be developed. What four? (1) Here, a bhikkhu dwells contemplating the body in the body, ardent, clearly comprehending, mindful, having removed longing and dejection in regard to the world. (2) He dwells contemplating feelings in feelings … (3) … mind in mind … (4) … phenomena in phenomena, ardent, clearly comprehending, mindful, having removed longing and dejection in regard to the world. For direct knowledge of lust, these four things are to be developed.

I see longing and dejection more deep and emotional. It's not the same to say that unrestrained sense faculties lead to covetousness or displeasure than to say that they lead to longing and dejection. With the latter I thought that the Buddha was teaching us how to avoid these unpleasant emotions but it seems he is teaching us to remove the unwholesome (viewtopic.php?p=637207)

[rekoW]

thought i'd share this post from ven sujato in response to mine on suttacentral:

(me) "Ven ñānananda uses ‘preparations’, which pertains to the etymology of a stage show."

(sujato) "Saṅkhārā is an actual act of will, a choice to do something, not just preparing to do something.

I like "choices". When I go to the supermarket, I look at & see many different produckts on the shelf and I make a choice about what to buy. I first see & then I make a choice. If there is a wine or cheese tasting I taste the wine & cheese and I make the choice to buy that wine or this cheeze. If I buy aftershave, I first smell the different kinds of aftershave and then I make a choice. So "choices" is cool. I am always making choices about what i see, hear, taste, smell, touch and even think. Sometime my thoughts are scary! Choices!

Try using one of the other terms, see how they fit:

meritorious volitional formations?
complexes of merit?
meritorious preparations?
meritorious kammic formations?
meritorious fabrications?
good choices?

I saw pictures of starving children in Africa and give a donation and sponsor a child. Am I making meritorious formations towards this hungry children i see in Africa?

[asahi]

I like "choices". When I go to the supermarket, I look at & see many different produckts on the shelf and I make a choice about what to buy.

Dependent arising is about how the state of mind in ignorance led to fabrication of identity , not about to choose something in supermarket . Dont get it wrong .

[rekoW]

the state of mind in ignorance led to fabrication of identity

OK. Its like the Hinudism "I am That". The mind in ignorance led to identity led to the consciousness of the sensory world as "I Am That". "I am the World". "I am thE Supermarket". Thank you. I try Dont get it wrong . It is not "choices". It is "Idenitity".

[Jack19990101]

All our average daily emotions are sustained on wrong view.
Our hope/longing, our fear/dejection, are too.

They are all to be uprooted.
Hope/lack of security, specifically, is due to unable to see the illusory nature of future.

[Jack19990101]

With four exceptions - Brahma vihara
Those are the four possible attitudes of a peerless being.

[mjaviem]

All our average daily emotions are sustained on wrong view.
Our hope/longing, our fear/dejection, are too.

They are all to be uprooted.
Hope/lack of security, specifically, is due to unable to see the illusory nature of future.

With four exceptions - Brahma vihara
Those are the four possible attitudes of a peerless being.

It's not about "uprooting" emotions such as fear or sadness like a psychotherapy. It's about not delighting in emotions, not liking and disliking them. Like here:

...
“But what, venerable sir, is that precipice steeper and more frightful than that one?”

“Those ascetics and brahmins, bhikkhu, who do not understand as it really is: ‘This is suffering’; who do not understand as it really is: ‘This is the origin of suffering’; who do not understand as it really is: ‘This is the cessation of suffering’; who do not understand as it really is: ‘This is the way leading to the cessation of suffering’—they delight in volitional formations that lead to birth, in volitional formations that lead to aging, in volitional formations that lead to death, in volitional formations that lead to sorrow, lamentation, pain, displeasure, and despair. Delighting in such volitional formations, they generate volitional formations that lead to birth, generate volitional formations that lead to aging, generate volitional formations that lead to death, generate volitional formations that lead to sorrow, lamentation, pain, displeasure, and despair. Having generated such volitional formations, they tumble down the precipice of birth, tumble down the precipice of aging, tumble down the precipice of death, tumble down the precipice of sorrow, lamentation, pain, displeasure, and despair. They are not freed from birth, aging, and death; not freed from sorrow, lamentation, pain, displeasure, and despair; not freed from suffering, I say.
...

[ToVincent]

...
However, most of the time Bhikkhu Bodhi, Bhikkhu Sujato, and Thanissaro Bhikkhu are quite consistent, so if you see "stress" in a TB translation you know it's dukkha, and so on...

I'll give you an example of the contrary: "loke abhijjhādomanassaṁ".
(e.g.) Bhikkhu Bodhi sometimes translate it as "covetousness and displeasure in regard to the world"

It is just mere plagarism from Woodward (https://obo.genaud.net/dhamma-vinaya/pt ... od.pts.htm)
From Thanissaro to the unfortunate Sujato.

dhammesu dhammānupassī, ānanda, bhikkhu tasmiṁ samaye viharati ātāpī sampajāno satimā, vineyya loke abhijjhādomanassaṁ,
should be translated as follows:

At such a time a bhikkhu fetches distinctively a noticeable phenomenon/undertaking (sing.), in/among phenomena/undertakings (plur.)—governed by the lower mano and the higher thought in the world—of active mind (ed, from the acquisition of citta), having made a clear distinction between the two, causing affliction (ātapa RV.).
dhammesu dhammānupassī, ānanda, bhikkhu tasmiṁ samaye viharati ātāpī sampajāno satimā, vineyya loke abhijjhādomanassaṁ.

Having seen with discernment the spring up of the lower (corrupting-dus) mano, and the higher thought , he looks at it thoroughly with indifference (disregard).
So yaṁ taṁ hoti abhijjhā-domanassānaṁ pahānaṁ taṁ paññāya disvā sādhukaṁ ajjhupekkhitā hoti.
(I don't think this last part has a parallel, anywhere in the other early texts).
SN 54.13

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Abhijjhā: (abhi + dhyā/dhyai)
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Dhyā:
- to think of - Br. GṛŚrS. MBh.
Abhi:
- a prefix to verbs and nouns , expressing superiority.

:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Do-Manassa
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Do = dus var. dur, duś, duṣ, duḥ = inferior, that corrupts, evil.

Manassa - fr. mano.


:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Pahāna - (pra-hā-na)
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
- the spring up.
prahā:
- to spring up - ŚBr.

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Vineyya (vineya = vi-neya)
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
neya:
- to be led, governed.

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Ajjhupekkhitā = adhi + upa + ikṣ - (adhi+upekṣ)
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
upekṣ:
- look at or on ŚBr. MBh. (meaning across Buddha's time).
Adhi:
- from above.

____________

NOTE:
Anupassin/anupassī is an adjective (as red or happy - that is to say "contemplative" - which is the proper adjective from the verb "contemplate"); then anupassī becomes the "contemplative body" (or in a more proper English: the body that is contemplated).

However, anupaś [ anu-√ paś ], in Sanskrit, means to perceive, to notice. (RV, ŚBr., BṛĀr.Up, ChUp. ).

So "contemplative" might well be replaced by "perceptive", or "noticeable" (capable of being perceived). The latter ("perceptive", and "noticeable", being also both adjectives).

Then "ajjhattaṃ vā kāye kāyānupassī viharāhi" would become:.
"Internally, he fetches distinctively the noticeable body, in (among) the body" .
But to put it even more properly in the context of mindfulness, it would be:
"Internally, he fetches distinctively the body that is capable to be perceived, in the body".
.
.
So one would have the more proper following definition:

Ajjhattaṃ vā kāye kāyānupassī viharāhi.
Internally, he fetches distinctively the body that is capable to be perceived, in the body.
...
Ajjhattaṃ vā vedanāsu vedanānupassī viharāhi
Internally, he fetches distinctively the feeling that is capable to be perceived, in the feelings.
...
Ajjhattaṃ vā citte cittānupassī viharāhi
Internally, he fetches distinctively the citta that is capable to be perceived , in the citta.
...
Ajjhattaṃ vā dhammesu dhammānupassī viharāhi
Internally, he fetches distinctively the phenomena/undertaking that is capable to be perceived, in the phenomenas/undertakings.

kāya（m) - kaye = locative singular.
vedanā (f) - vedanāsu = locative plural
citta（nt) - citte = locative singular
dhamma (m) - dhammesu = locative plural

And that goes pretty well with a high & low breath:
https://i.ibb.co/LpfHSWv/Anapana.png

In the case of the verbs assasanto & passasanto, the Sanskrit considers dīgha (dīrgha) and rassa (hrasva [hras-va]), as adverbs - whose translation is far (lofty/high) & close (low) - and not long & short (as it would be, in the case of an adjective).

Long & short has been wrongly, the prefered translation of dīrgha & rassa.

.
.

[Coëmgenu]

It is just mere plagarism from Woodward (https://obo.genaud.net/dhamma-vinaya/pt ... od.pts.htm)
From Thanissaro to the unfortunate Sujato.

Please cease with these lies about translators allegedly plagiarizing each other. The only reason you tell such falsehoods is because no one agrees with the eccentric reconstructed definitions you like to give for Buddhist terms.

[ToVincent]

...

Please, stop being hysterical about proper translations.
I have already told you that it leads you to mere biased logic:
viewtopic.php?p=680874&hilit=Co%C3%ABmgenu#p680874

Abhijjhā-domanassāna does not mean "covetousness and displeasure in regard to the world".
What kind of locative preposition is "in regard to", anyway?

-------

Oh, and I know how disturbing such a proper translation can be for a mara.
A corrupting, evil low mano (do-manas) - In a mara's exclusively sensory world.
Hiiiiiiii!
.
.

[Ceisiwr]

...

Please, stop being hysterical about proper translations.
I have already told you that it leads you to mere biased logic:
viewtopic.php?p=680874&hilit=Co%C3%ABmgenu#p680874

Abhijjhā-domanassāna does not mean "covetousness and displeasure in regard to the world".
What kind of locative preposition is "in regard to", anyway?

-------

Oh, and I know how disturbing such a proper translation can be for a mara.
A corrupting, evil low mano (do-manas) - In a mara's exclusively sensory world.
Hiiiiiiii!
.
.

“Everyone I don’t like is Mara”

[ToVincent]

“Everyone I don’t like is Mara”

No! - Everyone that think that everything is sensory, is mara.

-----

And "abhijjhā"* does not mean "covetousness" - no more than "do-manassa" means "displeasure".
And loke is a locative.

abhijjhā：(cf. abhi-jhāyati - Pali & Sk. fr. abhi + dhyā)
https://dictionary.sutta.org/browse/a/abhijjh%C4%81/

Jhāyati:
https://dictionary.sutta.org/browse/j/jh%C4%81yati/

Stop your ill-conceived absurd trolling.
.
.

[Coëmgenu]

How wonderful it would be to be as fancy as "a Māra." I'm rather unfancy, in truth.

[ToVincent]

How wonderful it would be to be as fancy as "a Māra." I'm rather unfancy, in truth.

Your usual preposterous claptrap, does not make "abhijjhā" = "covetousness", a sure thing though — just another harried chronically nonsense.
Ludicrous!


-----

Woodward's translation ("coveting") was flawed, and the following translators were mere plagiarists .

So, my translation has nothing of an "eccentric reconstructed definition(s) I like to give for Buddhist terms", as you put it. It just come from the proper meaning found in the PTS dictionary, as seen above.

-----

So you too, stop your ill-conceived absurd trolling.
You are definitely looking ridiculous now.
.
.

[Coëmgenu]

ToVincent, please don't tell lies about actual real translators (unlike you) plagiarizing, then you won't have to go on these rants afterwards. I really don't care whether or not you think I look ridiculous.