Sevana -- Associating or Service from Sn2.4

Explore the ancient language of the Tipitaka and Theravāda commentaries
Post Reply
Kilaya Ciriello
Posts: 24
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2023 1:50 pm

Sevana -- Associating or Service from Sn2.4

Post by Kilaya Ciriello »

The Mangala Sutta (Sn2.4) contains the Pali "sevana" and seems consistently translated as "associating with" the wise. This is one of the Buddha's recommendations for what is auspicious "mangalam." There are other suttas however that seem to suggest that a legitimate translation here could also be "service to" the wise. If so, why do the existing translations consistently read "associating" especially within a sutta that is so widely translated in different ways in other parts?

MN96 the Buddha states:
Brahmin, I don’t say that you should serve everyone, nor do I say that you shouldn’t serve anyone. I say that you shouldn’t serve someone if serving them makes you worse, not better. And I say that you should serve someone if serving them makes you better, not worse.


This sutta among others seems to support the Buddha respecting and recommending actual service of another as a way of not only honoring them but also as a way of ensuring that they teach you the dhamma.

https://dictionary.sutta.org/browse/s/sevana/ lists "service" as the "#2" definition behind "associating" and yet, translators have ruled this out so consistently? I am wondering if there is a Western bias at play here that is resistant to the Eastern concept of service? Or maybe the modern history of abuse between "gurus" and their disciples is a factor leading translator/scholars to discourage this kind of thing within the Buddhist world? Thank you for the opportunity to gain knowledge through this forum.
User avatar
Sam Vara
Site Admin
Posts: 13482
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm
Location: Portsmouth, U.K.

Re: Sevana -- Associating or Service from Sn2.4

Post by Sam Vara »

Kilaya Ciriello wrote: Mon Mar 20, 2023 12:46 pm The Mangala Sutta (Sn2.4) contains the Pali "sevana" and seems consistently translated as "associating with" the wise. This is one of the Buddha's recommendations for what is auspicious "mangalam." There are other suttas however that seem to suggest that a legitimate translation here could also be "service to" the wise. If so, why do the existing translations consistently read "associating" especially within a sutta that is so widely translated in different ways in other parts?

MN96 the Buddha states:
Brahmin, I don’t say that you should serve everyone, nor do I say that you shouldn’t serve anyone. I say that you shouldn’t serve someone if serving them makes you worse, not better. And I say that you should serve someone if serving them makes you better, not worse.


This sutta among others seems to support the Buddha respecting and recommending actual service of another as a way of not only honoring them but also as a way of ensuring that they teach you the dhamma.

https://dictionary.sutta.org/browse/s/sevana/ lists "service" as the "#2" definition behind "associating" and yet, translators have ruled this out so consistently? I am wondering if there is a Western bias at play here that is resistant to the Eastern concept of service? Or maybe the modern history of abuse between "gurus" and their disciples is a factor leading translator/scholars to discourage this kind of thing within the Buddhist world? Thank you for the opportunity to gain knowledge through this forum.
It seems from the PED that it has both meanings, depending on context - if you think about the English words, they are quite close in meaning if we consider a person's dealings with a group or organisation. You serve or support a sports team, for example, if you follow them. So it probably has a range of meanings around listening to what monks say and taking their instruction and advice; and also providing them with dāna or material support and service. The PED has:
:: Sevati [sev]
1. to serve, associate with, resort to Vin II 203; A I 124f.; Snp 57, 75; Pp 33; It 107; Ja III 525; Pj II 169.
2. to practice, embrace, make use of Vin I 10 = S V 421; D III 157; S I 12; M III 45; Dhp 167, 293, 310; Snp 72, 391, 927; Nidd I 383, 481; Ja I 152, 361; preterit asevissaṃ Ja IV 178. — past participle sevita: see ā°, vi°.

:: Sevanatā (—°) (feminine) [abstr, from sevati] = sevanā Vibh-a 282f.

:: Sevanā (feminine) [from sevati] following, associating with Snp 259; Dhs 1326; Pp 20; Dhātup 285 (as neuter); cohabiting Vin III 29.

:: Sevā (feminine) [from sev] service, resorting to S I 110; Thig-a 179.
The noun sevanā seems to be restricted to following and associating with, so if that is used - as opposed to the verb - then "following" might seem to be a safer bet.
User avatar
Ṭhānuttamo
Posts: 188
Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2017 1:40 pm
Location: Kefenrod, Germany
Contact:

Re: Sevana -- Associating or Service from Sn2.4

Post by Ṭhānuttamo »

Kilaya Ciriello wrote: Mon Mar 20, 2023 12:46 pm The Mangala Sutta (Sn2.4) contains the Pali "sevana" and seems consistently translated as "associating with" the wise. This is one of the Buddha's recommendations for what is auspicious "mangalam." There are other suttas however that seem to suggest that a legitimate translation here could also be "service to" the wise. If so, why do the existing translations consistently read "associating" especially within a sutta that is so widely translated in different ways in other parts? [...] I am wondering if there is a Western bias at play here that is resistant to the Eastern concept of service? Or maybe the modern history of abuse between "gurus" and their disciples is a factor leading translator/scholars to discourage this kind of thing within the Buddhist world? Thank you for the opportunity to gain knowledge through this forum.
For the occurrence of Pāḷi asevanā in the Maṅgalasutta, "non-association" as the corresponding translation is the best fit. The commentarial context is clear on this: "Therein, "non-association" means "not resorting to," "not sitting close by" (tattha asevanāti abhajanā apayirupāsanā; Khp-a -- Maṅgalasutta Commentary). The Pāḷi word bhajanā ("resorting to") is elsewhere also explained by means of upasaṅkamanā ("approaching," "visiting"). The commentary further contains explanations in the context of upanayhati ("binds together"), upasevanā ("keeping company with") and quotes that one shouldn't even see (na passe) or hear (na suṇe) a fool and not live together with one (na ca bālena saṃvase). So, I don't think any bias is at work here when it comes to the translation choices of the various scholars; I see it rather as more evidence that "non-association" is what is meant, but the idea of "service" is of course closely associated here, too.

Ṭhānuttamo
Post Reply