MN 8 Sujato encouraging us to extinguish others if we become an arahant?

[frank k]

http://notesonthedhamma.blogspot.com/20 ... us-to.html

I'm curious to hear what people think about 'extinguish'.
Good translation for nirvana? Bad? confusing?

[santa100]

http://notesonthedhamma.blogspot.com/20 ... us-to.html

I'm curious to hear what people think about 'extinguish'.
Good translation for nirvana? Bad? confusing?

Nothing wrong with "extinguish" as long as clarifying what is being extinguished. When in doubt, stick with Bodhi's or Thanissaro's versions, not Sujato's.

“Cunda, that one who is himself sinking in the mud should pull out another who is sinking in the mud is impossible; that one who is not himself sinking in the mud should pull out another who is sinking in the mud is possible. That one who is himself untamed, undisciplined, with defilements unextinguished, should tame another, discipline him, and help extinguish his defilements is impossible; that one who is himself tamed, disciplined, with defilements extinguished, should tame another, discipline him, and help extinguish his defilements is possible.

versus:

Truly, Cunda, if you’re sinking down in the mud you can’t pull out someone else who is also sinking down in the mud. But if you’re not sinking down in the mud you can pull out someone else who is sinking down in the mud. Truly, if you’re not tamed, trained, and extinguished you can’t tame, train, and extinguish someone else. But if you’re tamed, trained, and extinguished you can tame, train, and extinguish someone else.

[SarathW]

http://notesonthedhamma.blogspot.com/20 ... us-to.html

I'm curious to hear what people think about 'extinguish'.
Good translation for nirvana? Bad? confusing?

Nothing wrong with "extinguish" as long as clarifying what is being extinguished. When in doubt, stick with Bodhi's or Thanissaro's versions, not Sujato's.

“Cunda, that one who is himself sinking in the mud should pull out another who is sinking in the mud is impossible; that one who is not himself sinking in the mud should pull out another who is sinking in the mud is possible. That one who is himself untamed, undisciplined, with defilements unextinguished, should tame another, discipline him, and help extinguish his defilements is impossible; that one who is himself tamed, disciplined, with defilements extinguished, should tame another, discipline him, and help extinguish his defilements is possible.

versus:

Truly, Cunda, if you’re sinking down in the mud you can’t pull out someone else who is also sinking down in the mud. But if you’re not sinking down in the mud you can pull out someone else who is sinking down in the mud. Truly, if you’re not tamed, trained, and extinguished you can’t tame, train, and extinguish someone else. But if you’re tamed, trained, and extinguished you can tame, train, and extinguish someone else.

It appears to me that Sujato's translation of this is very inferior and confusing.

[Ontheway]

I always prefer Bhante Bhikkhu Bodhi's translation over Bhante Sujato's.

[gemmalyly]

The sutta explains that a person who has attained arahantship has developed this quality to its highest degree, and as a result, they are no longer attached to any particular person or group. They are also free from all defilements, including craving, aversion, and ignorance.
contexto

[BrokenBones]

I skipped through the transcript of 'anarchist'... not very inspiring.

[Dhammapardon]

It's good to remember teachers are people, and like other people they have mixed kamma.
I value Bhante Sujato's common english translations and website and am greatful for those as they've provided many benefits to my study.
Like any fruit with a bruise, mindfully eat around it.

[knotting]

Not accepting your views on consciousness doesn’t make him a nihilist either.

This translation suggests that there is an actual 'you' (self) to be extinguished, which sure feels like annihilationism:

Truly, if you’re not tamed, trained, and extinguished

[Ceisiwr]

Not accepting your views on consciousness doesn’t make him a nihilist either.

This translation suggests that there is an actual 'you' (self) to be extinguished, which sure feels like annihilationism:

Truly, if you’re not tamed, trained, and extinguished

That’s his translation of “attanā”, which means “with oneself” or “by oneself”. His translation doesn’t sound like annihilationism at all. Rather it captures the more general language the Buddha often used.

[knotting]

That’s his translation of “attanā”, which means “with oneself” or “by oneself”. His translation doesn’t sound like annihilationism at all. Rather it captures the more general language the Buddha often used.

Perhaps it's more accurate, but the impression I get is one of annihilationism. I thought there was no self to be extinguished in the first place?

[Ceisiwr]

That’s his translation of “attanā”, which means “with oneself” or “by oneself”. His translation doesn’t sound like annihilationism at all. Rather it captures the more general language the Buddha often used.

Perhaps it's more accurate, but the impression I get is one of annihilationism. I thought there was no self to be extinguished in the first place?

There isn’t, but we still have to use language. That means using nouns, pro-nouns, verbs, adjectives etc.

[Mumfie]

I'm curious to hear what people think about 'extinguish'.

I think the flaw in rendering parinibbāpessati as "extinguishes" is that it treats a future tense verb as present tense, a passive voice verb as active voice, and a causative verb as non-causative.

Whatever English verb we opt for, the translation ought to reflect these grammatical features. So, if we use, say, the verb to distim, then the form of the English sentence ought to be something like:

"Gostak will cause Dosh to be/become distimmed".

"Gostak will make Dosh become distimmed."

"Gostak will bring about the distimming of Dosh."

Etc.

[cappuccino]

sure feels like annihilationism:

No self is annihilationism