The Relationship between Nirvana and Buddhahood: what constitutes a true extinction?

[reiun]

The fact that mistranslations are reported to be so widespread is a on what many unwittingly believe or have been taught. If a student is mainly academic-oriented, this is a major problem of which he or she may be unaware. How to figure where to put trust?

[Malcolm]

The fact that mistranslations are reported to be so widespread is a on what many unwittingly believe or have been taught. If a student is mainly academic-oriented, this is a major problem of which he or she may be unaware. How to figure where to put trust?

One needs to rely on newer translations, if one is not inclined to learn languages.

[Malcolm]

Don't worry Malcolm, we can deal with delusions. After all, we are Buddhists!
(I guess, with an orientation and commitment to practice, I was lucky to sidestep this academic quagmire . . .)

I am not an academic; but for example, relying on deficient translations, the Dharma becomes like the telephone game...and you know how that always ends.

[Budai]

Once we played telephone in class. And went all around. It always got messed up. But when “I Love you” was the phrase, it went all around unhindered and unchanged.

[Schrödinger’s Yidam]

Nirvana is a cessation, an absence of a cause for further arising. It is not an annihilation, an extinction, nor an extinguishing….

….in Mahayana.

In all schools.

Sautantrikas?

[Malcolm]

….in Mahayana.

In all schools.

Sautantrikas?

Yes.

[Schrödinger’s Yidam]

In all schools.

Sautantrikas?

Yes.

From 2/8/2020:

https://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.p ... 0&start=80

[PadmaVonSamba]

Well technically, annihilation or total extinguishing of the kleshas is accurate.

Technically, it is not. For āryas, afflictions no longer cause action, and so suffering ceases. In general, in Abhidharma, where we find the most detailed description of afflictions and so, they are abandoned, exhausted, etc, not annihilated or extinguished.

But an arya is not the same as a Buddha

[reiun]

Sautantrikas?

Yes.

From 2/8/2020:

https://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.p ... 0&start=80

[Malcolm]

Yes.

From 2/8/2020:

https://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.p ... 0&start=80

Mahayanis agree with Sauntantra that cessations are pure absence of causes. They disagree with the consequence of such a cessation, and criticize the Sautranta school for asserting cessation to be nonexistence.

[reiun]

I am not an academic . . .

So: no PhD, published papers, books, etc.? And no need for attributions we could learn from, either.

[Johnny Dangerous]

I am not an academic . . .

So: no PhD, published papers, books, etc.? And no need for attributions we could learn from, either.

https://wisdomexperience.org/content-au ... olm-smith/

Anyway, I think a part of this question (at least for me as someone with limited scholarly abilities and language skills) is open disclosure of the translator's method. I don't object to somewhat "poetic" versions of things on principle necessarily, I just want to know if that's what's going on.

[reiun]

In fact, an academic, insofar as holding a degree in his field, and having published. What to make of this

[Malcolm]

In fact, an academic, insofar as holding a degree in his field, and having published. What to make of this

No, I am not an academic. I have a nonwestern, traditional education, not an academic education in a Western University, other than a couple of years of random courses at an extension school, into which I never matriculated for a degree,

[Johnny Dangerous]

In fact, an academic, insofar as holding a degree in his field, and having published. What to make of this

Buddhist scholar does not always equal "academic" in my experience.

There are lots of published authors with extensive educations in Dharma that I wouldn't call academics. I have a teacher that is in a similar place, extremely well educated in Dharma subjects, educated up to masters in his Western education, has done some translation work, but he does not act like academic and does not interact with others as one, including students.

This teacher is also a Sakya Loppon in fact, I am not sure he would view that education as an 'academic' one in the sense we normally use the word.

When I hear "academic" in Buddhist scholarship I first think of people conducting historical research from a mostly Western linear-historical point of view.

[reiun]

Good to know that nonwestern=non-scholarly. But then that raises the issue of questioning historical, scholarly works from that perspective. Certainly this is not an issue of false humility on your part, but without lines of specific attribution, and a rationale why texts are bad only because they are old and well-established, a question may arise.

[Johnny Dangerous]

Good to know that nonwestern=non-scholarly.

It just means that a Buddhist education has different priorities than a Western one, not that it's not scholarly. I've talked with Khenpos and Loppon's just enough to say I think this is definitely so, it's certainly scholarly, but it's not really academic in the Western sense because it's well...not an education which is part of the Western "Academy", and in fact involves some suppositions that are not accepted, and presumably sometimes not even respected by the Western academic culture.

The difference in translations is most noticeable the farther back you go...read some of the oldest translations of the Dhammapada for a really good example. By today's standards they are just straight up unacceptable, they do things like translate Sangha as "church", affliction as "sin" and similar. Even a lot of translations from the 60's and 70's are off that way by today's standards.

It's a clumsy and obvious example, but the less the translator really understands the cultural and spiritual meaning of words, the more you get stuff like that.

[SilenceMonkey]

Good to know that nonwestern=non-scholarly. But then that raises the issue of questioning historical, scholarly works from that perspective. Certainly this is not an issue of false humility on your part, but without lines of specific attribution, and a rationale why texts are bad only because they are old and well-established, a question may arise.

I think what makes a translation bad is inaccuracy. Poetry of language comes second.

As an aside, western academics in Buddhist studies, more often than not, don't have a comprehensive training in Dharma itself. Rarely do they even speak the language in question. Their training is quite different than what you get from buddhist masters and scholars of Dharma (as opposed to scholars who are only trained in western universities). Imagine asking a western academic who doesn't practice very much and isn't trained in zen to translate a zen text. I'm not sure it will be very good.

[Malcolm]

Good to know that nonwestern=non-scholarly.

That’s not what I said, despite whatever conclusion you may have drawn. The point is that the term this thread is predicated upon is mistranslated when it is rendered “extinction.”

[reiun]

One needs to rely on newer translations

And what cut-off year are you willing to recommend?