Parting from the Four Attachments in Tibetan?

This is a space for inquiries about various languages, translations, or anything else related to language.

Parting from the Four Attachments in Tibetan?

Postby kirtu » Tue Dec 13, 2011 6:41 pm

Does anyone have a link to Parting from the Four Attachments in Tibetan by Sachen Kunga Nyingpo?

And here it is on the Rigpa Wiki.

If you are attached to this life, you are not a true spiritual practitioner.
If you are attached to samsara, you do not have renunciation.
If you are attached to your own self-interest, you have no bodhichitta.
If there is grasping, you do not have the View.

༈ ཚེ་འདི་ལ་ཞེན་ན་ཆོས་པ་མིན།
འཁོར་བ་ལ་ཞེན་ན་ངེས་འབྱུང་མིན།
རང་དོན་ལ་ཞེན་ན་བྱང་སེམས་མིན།
འཛིན་པ་དངོས་པོ་ལ་ཞེན་ན་ལྟ་བ་མིན།


Kirt
Kirt's Tibetan Translation Notes

"Only you can make your mind beautiful."
HH Chetsang Rinpoche
User avatar
kirtu
Former staff member
 
Posts: 4422
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2010 5:29 pm
Location: Baltimore, MD

Re: Parting from the Four Attachments in Tibetan?

Postby kirtu » Tue Dec 13, 2011 9:12 pm

What are the rules for this pronounciation: ངེས་འབྱུང nyen joong ?

ངེ nga modified with the e'
ས silent (really silent or adding an n ?)
་འ silent short a (really or combining with ངེས་ ?)
བྱུ b-u-y sound all at once?
ང ng ending

Pointers gratefully appreciated!

Thanks!

Kirt
Kirt's Tibetan Translation Notes

"Only you can make your mind beautiful."
HH Chetsang Rinpoche
User avatar
kirtu
Former staff member
 
Posts: 4422
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2010 5:29 pm
Location: Baltimore, MD

Re: Parting from the Four Attachments in Tibetan?

Postby tantular » Wed Dec 14, 2011 12:03 pm

ngay joong in standard Tibetan. Final is never pronounced "n"; it's always silent, but fronts and lengthens the preceding vowel. "E" is already a front vowel, so it merely lengthens. Initial can become a nasalization if the preceding syllable ends in a vowel, e.g. དགེ་འདུན་ pronounced gendün, but in ངེས་འབྱུང་ the intervenes and the remains silent.
tantular
 
Posts: 53
Joined: Sat Oct 01, 2011 8:36 am

Re: Parting from the Four Attachments in Tibetan?

Postby kirtu » Wed Dec 14, 2011 7:19 pm

In ཚེ་འདི་ལ་ཞེན་ན་ཆོས་པ་མིན -

is ཞེན་ན in the locative case? Is the ན indicating locative case? If so does this just apply to ཞེན attachment - wait this is a verb so it can't be a noun inflection.

The whole structure of the verses is a premise followed by a negated conclusion on each line so are verbs actually needed and used in this structure?

Is the ལ in ཚེ་འདི་ལ indicating the alliative case or should this just be treated as an atomic phrase?

Thanks!

(I am getting Preston and Wilson out of storage soon - as it turns out Preston has a Tibetan grammar blog too).

Kirt
Kirt's Tibetan Translation Notes

"Only you can make your mind beautiful."
HH Chetsang Rinpoche
User avatar
kirtu
Former staff member
 
Posts: 4422
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2010 5:29 pm
Location: Baltimore, MD

Re: Parting from the Four Attachments in Tibetan?

Postby kirtu » Thu Dec 15, 2011 12:20 am

Why is འཁོར་བ pronounced kor-wa at all? Why does the take a "wa" sound when there is a perfectly fine letter for that already: ?

Thanks!

Kirt
Kirt's Tibetan Translation Notes

"Only you can make your mind beautiful."
HH Chetsang Rinpoche
User avatar
kirtu
Former staff member
 
Posts: 4422
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2010 5:29 pm
Location: Baltimore, MD

Re: Parting from the Four Attachments in Tibetan?

Postby tantular » Fri Dec 16, 2011 12:45 am

I wouldn't worry too much about English case names---they bear no relation to how Tibetans understand their own language. Even the Tibetan case names, mechanically borrowed from Sanskrit, don't explain how particles are actually used. Tibetan's a very idiomatic language: the best way to learn is simply to read a lot and see how particles are used in real sentences, not to memorize allative vs. superessive locatives.

tshe 'di la zhen na = if [you are] attached to this life ...

"verb + na" = "if/when verb". This is an extremely common construction in both classical and colloquial.

zhen takes the particle la. Like English "attached to", but "greedy for", "desirous of", it's best to simply memorize the particles used with a verb at the same time as the verb's meaning.

is pronounced "wa" when it's used as a nominal suffix; this is simply one of the many sound changes to memorize.
tantular
 
Posts: 53
Joined: Sat Oct 01, 2011 8:36 am

Re: Parting from the Four Attachments in Tibetan?

Postby kirtu » Fri Dec 16, 2011 4:11 am

tantular wrote:tshe 'di la zhen na = if [you are] attached to this life ...

"verb + na" = "if/when verb". This is an extremely common construction in both classical and colloquial.


WOW! I had thought that perhaps the if itself was implied and that the la functioned like the preposition to.

zhen takes the particle la. Like English "attached to", but "greedy for", "desirous of", it's best to simply memorize the particles used with a verb at the same time as the verb's meaning.


Are there tables of particles and verbs for this?

Thanks!

Kirt
Kirt's Tibetan Translation Notes

"Only you can make your mind beautiful."
HH Chetsang Rinpoche
User avatar
kirtu
Former staff member
 
Posts: 4422
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2010 5:29 pm
Location: Baltimore, MD

Re: Parting from the Four Attachments in Tibetan?

Postby tantular » Fri Dec 16, 2011 11:52 am

kirtu wrote:WOW! I had thought that perhaps the if itself was implied and that the la functioned like the preposition to.


The Sumcupa doesn't distinguish the unique case usages of the 7 la don (la su ra ru du tu na), and doesn't discus non-case usages at all. In reality the different la don are not interchangeable, and la & na have distinct functions, unrelated to case, when they occur after verbs or adverbs. The tshig mdzod chen mo lists 8 non-case functions of na, almost all of which can be reduced to variations on "if/when" (I've selected the easiest examples for each):

1) distinguishing a point of view: མདོར་བསྡུས་ན་ in brief (lit. if one were to abbreviate)

2) indicating a cause: མེ་ཡོད་ན་དུ་བ་འབྱུང་ when there is fire, smoke will appear ས་བོན་བཏབ་ན་འབྲས་བུ་སྐྱེ་ if seeds had been planted, fruit would grow

3) indicating the aim of an action: ནད་མེད་ན་སྨན་པ་ཅིའི་ཕྱིར་བསྟེན་ if there is no illness, why take medicine?

4) indicating a contradiction: ཁོ་རང་མཁས་པ་ཡིན་པར་གྲགས་ནའང་བཟང་ངན་གྱི་དབྱེ་བ་འབྱེད་མི་ཤེས་པའི་རྨོངས་པ་ཞིག་རེད་འདུག although (lit. even if) he's renowned as a wise man, I can see that he's a fool who can't tell right from wrong

5) indicating the difficulty of accepting something: ཁྱི་ལའང་འཇིགས་ན་སེང་གེ་ལ་བཤད་མི་དགོས་ if [you're] afraid of just a dog, no need to speak of a lion!

6) to ascertain something about the following, contrasted phrase: དུད་འགྲོ་རྣམས་ཤིན་ཏུ་རྨོངས་ན་མིའང་དེ་ལྟར་འདུག while animals may be extremely ignorant, people are also like that! འབྲོག་པས་ཞིང་འདེབས་མི་ཤེས་ན་སོ་ནམ་པས་ཞིང་ཁ་འདེབས་མི་ཤེས་པའང་འདུག while nomads may not know how to plant fields, there's also some farmers who don't know how to plant a field!

7) expressing a hope/wish ངལ་རྩོལ་མི་དམངས་ཚང་མ་བཅིངས་འགྲོལ་ཐོབ་ན་ཅི་མ་རུང་ how wonderful it would be if all the working classes were to obtain freedom from their bonds! (nice bit of communist vocab)

8) indicating doubt: ས་བོན་ནི་བཏབ་ཟིན་ན་འདི་ལས་མྱུ་གུ་འབྱུང་ངམ་མི་འབྱུང་ if the seed had already been planted, shouldn't a sprout grow from it? (lit. would a sprout grow out of it or not?)

Are there tables of particles and verbs for this?


Not that I know of. The Jäschke and Chandradas dictionaries are outdated for technical vocabulary, but most entries include excellent quotations to show how the words are used in actual Tibetan texts. Other than reading a lot of basic Tibetan texts (easier with a good, literal translation as a guide), I found this the most useful tool.
tantular
 
Posts: 53
Joined: Sat Oct 01, 2011 8:36 am

Re: Parting from the Four Attachments in Tibetan?

Postby Malcolm » Fri Dec 16, 2011 6:37 pm

tantular wrote:I wouldn't worry too much about English case names---they bear no relation to how Tibetans understand their own language. Even the Tibetan case names, mechanically borrowed from Sanskrit, don't explain how particles are actually used.


:applause:
http://www.bhaisajya.net
http://www.bhaisajya.guru
http://atikosha.org
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔

Though there are infinite liberating gateways of Dharma,
there are none not included in the dimension of the knowledge of the Great Perfection.

-- Buddha Samantabhadri
User avatar
Malcolm
 
Posts: 11952
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Parting from the Four Attachments in Tibetan?

Postby kirtu » Fri Dec 16, 2011 7:08 pm

འཛིན་པ་དངོས་པོ་ལ་ཞེན་ན་ལྟ་བ་མིན

འཛིན་པ་ དངོས་པོ་ ལ་ ཞེན་ན་ ལྟ་བ་ མིན

dzhinpa tongpö la zhen-na tawa min ?

འཛིན་པ་ = verb, infinite ?, grasping

དངོས་པོ་ = noun ?, impermanent thing, functioning thing, phenomena

ལྟ་བ་ = noun ?, view, philosophical view, (but apparently not a specified view like a Buddhist view per se, just the idea of philosophical view ?)

If so this reads more like: If one is attached to grasping to phenomena then one doesn't have the view.

Ballpark?

Thanks!

Kirt
Kirt's Tibetan Translation Notes

"Only you can make your mind beautiful."
HH Chetsang Rinpoche
User avatar
kirtu
Former staff member
 
Posts: 4422
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2010 5:29 pm
Location: Baltimore, MD

Re: Parting from the Four Attachments in Tibetan?

Postby tantular » Sat Dec 17, 2011 10:46 am

kirtu wrote:འཛིན་པ་དངོས་པོ་ལ་ཞེན་ན་ལྟ་བ་མིན

འཛིན་པ་ དངོས་པོ་ ལ་ ཞེན་ན་ ལྟ་བ་ མིན

dzhinpa tongpö la zhen-na tawa min ?


pronunciation: dzinpa ngöpo la zhen na tawa min (in དངོས་པོ་, the naro (o vowel) marks the root letter. if a syllable has a diacritic vowel, it always marks the root letter)

but the form of the zhenpa zhidrel I learned is:

འཛིན་པ་འབྱུང་ན་ལྟ་བ་མིན།

dzinpa jung na tawa min

"if grasping arises it's not the view"

If so this reads more like: If one is attached to grasping to phenomena then one doesn't have the view.


your translation་would be this in tibetan: དངོས་པོ་ལ་འཛིན་པར་ཞེན་ན་ལྟ་བ་མེད།

my first reaction to the rigpawiki line is that it's not a genuine variant ་(genuine variants, attested in many commentaries, are 'khor ba for khams gsum in line 2, & rang don for bdag don in line 3). if it's proven to be a genuine variant, 'dzin pa and dngos po would be in apposition, so it would translated as:

"if you are attached to phenomena, i.e. grasping, it is not the view"

(actually it's impossible to translate this into english, because it now sounds like "grasping" is being equated with "being attached", rather than "phenomena", and i can't figure out any way to clear up the ambiguity)

finally, note the difference between min & med: lta ba min = is not the view, lta ba med = the view does not exist, one does not have the view
tantular
 
Posts: 53
Joined: Sat Oct 01, 2011 8:36 am

Re: Parting from the Four Attachments in Tibetan?

Postby kirtu » Sat Dec 17, 2011 2:40 pm

tantular wrote:but the form of the zhenpa zhidrel I learned is:

འཛིན་པ་འབྱུང་ན་ལྟ་བ་མིན།

dzinpa jung na tawa min

"if grasping arises it's not the view"
....

my first reaction to the rigpawiki line is that it's not a genuine variant


Yeah I had thought there might be a problem with the final line and the teaching CD's that HH Sakya Trizen and my notes are currently in storage and I can't find a teaching online on the zhenpa zhidrel that has both Tibetan and English (or German or French) to figure it out (and HH Sakya Trizen definitely did speak the verses in Tibetan and then did translate them - HE Chogye Trichen's book also may have it in Tibetan but that too is in storage).

So I'll ask Khenpo Kalsang but he may be traveling at the moment.

Kirt
Kirt's Tibetan Translation Notes

"Only you can make your mind beautiful."
HH Chetsang Rinpoche
User avatar
kirtu
Former staff member
 
Posts: 4422
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2010 5:29 pm
Location: Baltimore, MD

Re: Parting from the Four Attachments in Tibetan?

Postby MrDistracted » Sat Dec 17, 2011 3:07 pm

Hi Kirt

I've just checked , Chogye Trichen Rinpoche's book has the version that Tantular stated, in the Tibetan text at the back, ie " 'dzin pa byung na lta ba min"

The translation in this book is 'If grasping arises, you do not have the view'

All the best
MrDistracted
 
Posts: 143
Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2011 11:20 am

Re: Parting from the Four Attachments in Tibetan?

Postby kirtu » Sat Dec 17, 2011 4:51 pm

MrDistracted wrote:Hi Kirt

I've just checked , Chogye Trichen Rinpoche's book has the version that Tantular stated, in the Tibetan text at the back, ie " 'dzin pa byung na lta ba min"

The translation in this book is 'If grasping arises, you do not have the view'

All the best


Thanks! I wish that had a Kindle version.

Do the other three lines correspond to the version in HE's book?

Thanks!

Kirt
Kirt's Tibetan Translation Notes

"Only you can make your mind beautiful."
HH Chetsang Rinpoche
User avatar
kirtu
Former staff member
 
Posts: 4422
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2010 5:29 pm
Location: Baltimore, MD

Re: Parting from the Four Attachments in Tibetan?

Postby MrDistracted » Sat Dec 17, 2011 5:07 pm

:reading:
Yes, they're spot on.
It's just the last line that differs in the rigpawiki version.

I'll keep my copy next to my computer, feel free to ask if there's anything else you need to know from it...
MrDistracted
 
Posts: 143
Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2011 11:20 am

Re: Parting from the Four Attachments in Tibetan?

Postby kirtu » Sat Dec 17, 2011 11:44 pm

Thanks very much!

So it's actually:
If you are attached to this life, you are not a true spiritual practitioner.
If you are attached to samsara, you do not have renunciation.
If you are attached to your own self-interest, you have no bodhichitta.
If there is grasping, you do not have the View.


༈ ཚེ་འདི་ལ་ཞེན་ན་ཆོས་པ་མིན།
འཁོར་བ་ལ་ཞེན་ན་ངེས་འབྱུང་མིན།
རང་དོན་ལ་ཞེན་ན་བྱང་སེམས་མིན།
འཛིན་པ་འབྱུང་ན་ལྟ་བ་མིན།



Kirt
Kirt's Tibetan Translation Notes

"Only you can make your mind beautiful."
HH Chetsang Rinpoche
User avatar
kirtu
Former staff member
 
Posts: 4422
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2010 5:29 pm
Location: Baltimore, MD

Re: Parting from the Four Attachments in Tibetan?

Postby kirtu » Sun Dec 18, 2011 1:26 am

Namdrol wrote:
tantular wrote:I wouldn't worry too much about English case names---they bear no relation to how Tibetans understand their own language. Even the Tibetan case names, mechanically borrowed from Sanskrit, don't explain how particles are actually used.


:applause:


Then how do we make sense of the cases? It's torturous but in Latin the locative case (from memory) makes sense (although not to most hs students) and the nominative, accusative, dative and genitive cases in German make sense (although most Germans couldn't really explain them).

Are Tibetan cases then to be induced solely from examples?

Thanks!

Kirt
Kirt's Tibetan Translation Notes

"Only you can make your mind beautiful."
HH Chetsang Rinpoche
User avatar
kirtu
Former staff member
 
Posts: 4422
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2010 5:29 pm
Location: Baltimore, MD

Re: Parting from the Four Attachments in Tibetan?

Postby Malcolm » Sun Dec 18, 2011 3:08 am

kirtu wrote:Are Tibetan cases then to be induced solely from examples?


Yes.
http://www.bhaisajya.net
http://www.bhaisajya.guru
http://atikosha.org
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔

Though there are infinite liberating gateways of Dharma,
there are none not included in the dimension of the knowledge of the Great Perfection.

-- Buddha Samantabhadri
User avatar
Malcolm
 
Posts: 11952
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Parting from the Four Attachments in Tibetan?

Postby MrDistracted » Sun Dec 18, 2011 8:29 am

kirtu wrote:Thanks very much!

So it's actually:
If you are attached to this life, you are not a true spiritual practitioner.
If you are attached to samsara, you do not have renunciation.
If you are attached to your own self-interest, you have no bodhichitta.
If there is grasping, you do not have the View.


༈ ཚེ་འདི་ལ་ཞེན་ན་ཆོས་པ་མིན།
འཁོར་བ་ལ་ཞེན་ན་ངེས་འབྱུང་མིན།
རང་དོན་ལ་ཞེན་ན་བྱང་སེམས་མིན།
འཛིན་པ་འབྱུང་ན་ལྟ་བ་མིན།



Kirt


Ah, sorry...I missed something, in the version in ChogyeTrichen Rinpoche's book, in the third line instead of rang, it is bdag.

The translation given there is:

If you are attached to this life, you are not a person of Dharma.
If you are attached to cyclic existence, you do not have renunciation.
If you are attached to your own purpose, you do not have bodhichitta.
If grasping arises, you do not have the View.

Same, same, but different :smile:
MrDistracted
 
Posts: 143
Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2011 11:20 am

Re: Parting from the Four Attachments in Tibetan?

Postby kirtu » Sun Dec 18, 2011 1:08 pm

So it's
If you are attached to this life, you are not a true spiritual practitioner.
If you are attached to samsara, you do not have renunciation.
If you are attached to your own self-interest, you have no bodhichitta.
If there is grasping, you do not have the View.



༈ ཚེ་འདི་ལ་ཞེན་ན་ཆོས་པ་མིན།
འཁོར་བ་ལ་ཞེན་ན་ངེས་འབྱུང་མིན།
བདག་དོན་ལ་ཞེན་ན་བྱང་སེམས་མིན།
འཛིན་པ་འབྱུང་ན་ལྟ་བ་མིན།


?

བདག་དོན་ = self-interest or self-benefit
རང་དོན = one's own purpose/benefit,concern for oneself, selfish reasons

Maybe variants as these appear to be flavors of self-interest.

Kirt
Kirt's Tibetan Translation Notes

"Only you can make your mind beautiful."
HH Chetsang Rinpoche
User avatar
kirtu
Former staff member
 
Posts: 4422
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2010 5:29 pm
Location: Baltimore, MD

Next

Return to Language

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests

>