There is a handy comparison of terminology here: https://discourse.suttacentral.net/t/pa ... jato/12008 dhamma Bhikkhu Bodhi: (1) untranslated: the Buddha’s teaching; (2) things, phenomena; (3) mental phenomena, (mental) states, mind-objects; (4) qualities; (5) principle, law; (6) having the nature of, subject to (as suffix) Bhikhhu Sujato: (1) teaching (2) thing; (3) phenomena; (4) thoughts; [part of (3) in the BB list] (5) qualities; [4 in BB] (6) principle, law; [5 in BB] (7) liable to [as suffix] [6 in BB] ====================================================================== Bhikku Bodhi, MN Introduction https://www.wisdompubs.org/book/middle- ... troduction Dhamma In his later translations Ven. Ñāṇamoli appears to have set himself two goals: to render virtually every Pali word into English (arahant and bodhisatta are rare exceptions); and to do so in obedience to a very rigorous standard of consistency. In effect the principle that guided his work was: one Pali word, one corresponding English word. This principle he also applied to his treatment of the multiplex word dhamma, of which he wrote elsewhere that “the need for unity in the rendering is so great as to be almost desperate” (Minor Readings and Illustrator, p. 331). He chose as his root rendering the word “idea,” which he attempted to deploy for the Pali word in all its diverse occurrences. Even when dhamma is used in the suttas to signify the Buddha’s teaching, he still remained faithful to his choice by translating it “the True Idea.” Needless to say, this experiment was not successful. Recognising this, Ven. Khantipālo, in his edition of the ninety suttas, opted instead to retain the Pali word in most of its occurrences. This decision, however, seems to have been unnecessary when the relinquishment of the demand for strict consistency allows for smooth and reliable translation without loss of meaning. While the many different uses of the Pali word dhamma may originally have had some underlying connection of meaning, by the time of the Pali Canon such connection had already receded so far into the background as to be virtually irrelevant to the understanding of the texts. The commentaries ascribe at least ten different contextual meanings to the word as it occurs in the Canon and they do not try to read any philosophical significance into this variability of application. The goal of lucid translation therefore seems to require that the word be rendered differently according to its context, which generally makes the intended meaning clear. In revising Ven. Ñāṇamoli’s translation I have retained the Pali word Dhamma only when it refers to the Buddha’s teaching, or in several cases to a rival teaching with which the Buddha’s is contrasted (as at MN 11.13 https://suttacentral.net/mn11 and MN 104.2 https://suttacentral.net/mn104). In its other uses the context has been allowed to decide the rendering. Thus when dhamma occurs in the plural as a general ontological reference term it has been rendered “things” (as at MN 1.2 https://suttacentral.net/mn1 and MN 2.5 https://suttacentral.net/mn2). When it acquires a more technical nuance, in the sense either of the phenomena of existence or of mental constituents, it has been rendered “states” (as at MN 64.9 https://suttacentral.net/mn64 and MN 111.4 https://suttacentral.net/mn111). This term, however, must be divested of its overtone of staticity, dhammas being events within a dynamic process, and it must also not be taken to refer to some persisting entity that undergoes the states, entities themselves being nothing but connected series of dhammas. The last two meanings of dhamma are not always separable in the texts and sometimes naturalness of English diction had to be used as the factor for deciding which should be selected. As the fourth foundation of mindfulness and as the sixth external sense base (āyatana), dhamma has been rendered “mind-objects” (even here “ideas” is too narrow). In still other contexts it has been rendered as qualities (MN 15.3 https://suttacentral.net/mn15, MN 48.6 https://suttacentral.net/mn48) and teachings (MN 46.2 https://suttacentral.net/mn46, MN 47.3 https://suttacentral.net/mn47). When used as a suffix it acquires the idiomatic sense of “to be subject to” and so it has been translated, e.g., vipariṇāmadhamma as “subject to change.” ====================================================================== Bhikkhu Bodhi, SN Introduction: https://www.wisdompubs.org/book/connect ... troduction Dhamma Rather than embark on the quest for a single English rendering that can capture all the meanings of this polyvalent Pāli word, I have settled for the more pragmatic approach of using different renderings intended to match its different applications. When the word denotes the Buddha’s teaching, I have retained the Pāli “Dhamma,” for even “teaching” fails to convey the idea that what the Buddha teaches as the Dhamma is not a system of thought original to himself but the fundamental principles of truth, virtue, and liberation discovered and taught by all Buddhas throughout beginningless time. This is the Dhamma venerated by the Buddhas of the past, present, and future, which they look upon as their own standard and guide (see 6:2 https://suttacentral.net/sn6.2). From an internal “emic” point of view, the Dhamma is thus more than a particular religious teaching that has appeared at a particular epoch of human history. It is the timeless law in which reality, truth, and righteousness are merged in a seamless unity, and also the conceptual expression of this law in a body of spiritual and ethical teachings leading to the highest goal, Nibbāna, which is likewise comprised by the Dhamma. The word “Dhamma,” however, can also signify teachings that deviate from the truth, including the erroneous doctrines of the “outside” teachers. Thus the Jain teacher Nigaṇṭha Nātaputta is said to “teach the Dhamma to his disciples” (IV 317,25 https://suttacentral.net/sn42.8)—certainly not the Buddha’s teaching. In one passage I render Dhamma as “righteousness” (at the Se counterpart of IV 303,21 https://suttacentral.net/sn41.10). This is in the epithet dhammarājā used for a universal monarch, where “king of righteousness” fits better than “king of the Dhamma,” the significance the epithet has relative to the Buddha. The corresponding adjective, dhammika, is “righteous.” When dhamma occurs as a general term of reference, often in the plural, I usually render it “things.” As such, the word does not bear the narrow sense of concrete material objects but includes literally every-thing, such as qualities, practices, acts, and relationships. Thus the four factors of stream-entry are, as dhammas, things; so too are the twelve factors of dependent origination, the five aggregates, the six pairs of sense bases, and the diverse practices leading to enlightenment. Used in the plural, dhammā can also mean teachings, and so I render it at III 225,9 foll. https://suttacentral.net/sn25.1, though the exact sense there is ambiguous and the word might also mean the things that are taught rather than the teachings about them. One expression occurring in two suttas (II 58,3–4 https://suttacentral.net/sn12.33; IV 328,21–22 https://suttacentral.net/sn42.11), iminā dhammena, can be most satisfactorily rendered “by this principle,” though here dhamma points to the Dhamma as the essential teaching. Again, at I 167,9 https://suttacentral.net/sn3.5 (= I 168,25, 173,10), we have dhamme sati, “when this principle exists,” a rule of conduct followed by the Buddha. When plural dhammā acquires a more technical nuance, in contexts with ontological overtones, I render it “phenomena.” For instance, paṭicca-samuppannā dhammā are “dependently arisen phenomena” (II 26,7 https://suttacentral.net/sn12.20), and each of the five aggregates is loke lokadhamma, “a world-phenomenon in the world” that the Buddha has penetrated and taught (III 139,22 foll. https://suttacentral.net/sn22.94). When the word takes on a more psychological hue, I render it “states.” The most common example of this is in the familiar pair kusalā dhammā, wholesome states, and akusalā dhammā, unwholesome states (found, for example, in the formula for right effort; V 9,17–27 https://suttacentral.net/sn45.8). The enlightenment factor dhammavicaya-sambojjhaṅga is said to be nurtured by giving careful attention to pairs of contrasting mental states (among them wholesome and unwholesome states; V 66,18 https://suttacentral.net/sn46.2), and thus I render it “the enlightenment factor of discrimination of states.” But since the dhammas investigated can also be the four objective supports of mindfulness (V 331–32 https://suttacentral.net/sn54.13), dhammavicaya might have been translated “discrimination of phenomena.” Sometimes dhammā signifies traits of character more persistent than transient mental states; in this context I render it “qualities,” e.g., Mahākassapa complains that the bhikkhus “have qualities which make them difficult to admonish” (II 204,3–4 https://suttacentral.net/sn16.6). As a sense base and element, the dhammāyatana and dhammadhātu are the counterparts of the manāyatana, the mind base, and the manoviññāṇadhātu, the mind-consciousness element. The appropriate sense here would seem to be that of ideas and mental images, but the commentaries understand dhammas in these contexts to include not only the objects of consciousness but its concomitants as well. Thus I translate it “mental phenomena,” which is wide enough to encompass both these aspects of experience. As the fourth satipaṭṭhāna, objective base of mindfulness, dhammā is often translated “mind-objects.” So I rendered it in MLDB, but in retrospect this seems to me unsatisfactory. Of course, any existent can become an object of mind, and thus all dhammas in the fourth satipaṭṭhāna are necessarily mind-objects; but the latter term puts the focus in the wrong place. I now understand dhammas to be phenomena in general, but phenomena arranged in accordance with the categories of the Dhamma, the teaching, in such a way as to lead to a realization of the essential Dhamma embodied in the Four Noble Truths. Finally, -dhamma as a suffix has the meaning “is subject to” or “has the nature of.” Thus all dependently arisen phenomena are “subject to destruction, vanishing, fading away, and cessation” (khayadhamma, vayadhamma, virāgadhamma, nirodhadhamma; II 26,9 foll. https://suttacentral.net/sn12.20). The five aggregates are “of impermanent nature, of painful nature, of selfless nature” (aniccadhamma, dukkhadhamma, anattadhamma; III 195–96 https://suttacentral.net/sn23.11). ====================================================================== https://discourse.suttacentral.net/t/dhamma-in-4sps-dhamma-anupassana-and-dhamma-vicaya-sambojjhanga-is-principle-teaching-not-phenomena/9209/1 frankk Ven. Bodhi translates dhamma as “phenomena”. B.Sujato has “principles”: They meditate observing an aspect of principles—keen, aware, and mindful, rid of desire and aversion for the world. from standard sammā sati formula: (derived from ven. thanissaro’s) dhammā-(a)nupassī dhammesu dhammā-(a)nupassī viharati Mental-qualities-as mental-qualities he abides-in, ātāpī sampajāno satimā, (refrain:) ardent, aware, mindful, vineyya loke abhijjhā-domanassaṃ; Putting-away worldly greed-(and)-distress. evaṃ kho, bhikkhave, bhikkhu sato hoti. Thus indeed, monks, (a) monk {is} mindful ****. Ven. thanissaro uses “mental qualities” for dhamma. I think Thanissaro and Bodhi’s translation has been unduly influenced by late Theravada. The more comprehensively I’ve scanned the EBT’s, the more I’m convinced the primary meaning of “dhamma anupassana”, is closer to B. Sujato’s “principles”, by which I assume he means Principles according the truth of reality discovered by the Buddha. But I’d go even farther and say, “dhamma”, in the context of 4sp (satipatthana, i.e. right remembering/sati), is not just any principle, but specifically, the dhamma principles that directly lead to viraga, nirodha, patinissago, nirvana. What that exact dhamma is in any given moment, will vary according to the skill level and stage of the practitioner. dhamma as “phenomena” is too general and misses the point. sati means “remembering”, or recalling to mind frequently what one has memorized by heart. establishing the 4th of the 4 rememberings (dhamma anupassana), means that we are frequently to remember, to bear in mind in this very moment, the particular dhamma/teaching/principle that will right now be the most pertinent to leading to viraga and nirvana. In the last 4 steps of 16 APS (anapanasati), are explicitly stated to correspond with 4sp’s dhamma-anupassana. 13. anicca 14. viraga 15. nirodha 16. patinissaga And several passages in the EBT, we see those exact 4 words, in that exact sequence, as the final steps leading to the moment of realizing nirvana/arahantship. (SN 54.8, AN 7.61). There are also some sutta passages where the Buddha defines “dhamma” as those teachings that lead to dispassion/viraga. Conclusion: Even though “dhamma” has such broad meaning like the english word “thing”, I’m almost 100% convinced now that dhamma in dhamma-anupassana is not phenomena or mental qualities. dhamma contemplation in 4sp means employing a specific teaching that is most relevant and necessary in the moment to bring one to realization of nirvana. I don’t know the most concise way to express that, but I think “principle” or “teaching” is still too general. maybe “contemplation of dispassion-principles”. Discuss & Discover 2 Dhamma in 4sp’s dhamma-anupassana, and dhamma-vicaya-sambojjhanga, is principle/teaching, not “phenomena” Discussion Dhamma in 4sp’s dhamma-anupassana, and dhamma-vicaya-sambojjhanga, is principle/teaching, not “phenomena” Discussion Senryu dhamma as “phenomena” is too general and misses the point. How about ‘mental phenomena’, as the sense object of mano. Conclusion: Even though “dhamma” has such broad meaning like the english word “thing”, I’m almost 100% convinced now that dhamma in dhamma-anupassana is not phenomena or mental qualities. dhamma contemplation in 4sp means employing a specific teaching that is most relevant and necessary in the moment to bring one to realization of nirvana. I don’t know the most concise way to express that, but I think “principle” or “teaching” is still too general. Maybe ‘Teachings’ (with a capital T), or ‘dhamma teachings’ could fit? If you mean it is the cognitive function of the mind, deliberately ‘bringing to mind’ (sati) a specific teaching, to contemplate, let it work through your mind, suffice it and wriggle out any parts of the ‘world-view’ that sit in contradiction to the teaching - such as for example contemplating impermanence, but then contemplating the implication that reality has on many of the views one has which one takes for granted, but are based on the false implicit assumption of permanence. Anālayo has this to say about it: Most translators take the term dhammas in the Satipatthāna Sutta to mean “mental objects”, in the sense of whatever can become an object of the mind, in contradistinction to the objects of the other five senses. In regard to satipatthāna, however, this rendering appears strange. If the term dhammas were to refer to “objects of the mind”, then the other three satipatthānas should also be included here, since they too can become objects of the mind. Moreover, one of the exercises listed under the fourth satipatthāna is contemplation of the six senses together with their respective objects, so this contemplation of dhammas is not confined to the objects of the mind as the sixth sense only. In fact, the dhammas listed in the fourth satipatthāna, such as the hindrances and the aggregates, etc., do not naturally evoke the classification “mental objects”.1 [Note 1: Thaņissaro 1996: p.73. Patis II 234 simply suggests that whatever is not included in the previous three satipatthānas is to be understood as dhammas in this context. Sīiananda 1990: p.95, rejects a translation as “mental objects” and suggests leaving dhammas untranslated, a suggestion which I have followed. Alternative translations could be: “facts in general” (in Kalupahana 1992: p.74); “phenomena” (in Bodhi 2000: p.44, and in Jayasuriya 1988: p.161); “patterns of events” (in Harvey 1997: p.354); “conditions” (in Vajiranāņa 1975: p.59); or “principles” (in Watanabe 1983: p.16).] What this satipatthāna is actually concerned with are specific mental qualities (such as the five hindrances and the seven awakening factors), and analyses of experience into specific categories (such as the five aggregates, the six sense-spheres, and the four noble truths). These mental factors and categories constitute central aspects of the Buddha’s way of teaching, the Dhamma.2 These classificatory schemes are not in themselves the objects of meditation, but constitute frameworks or points of reference to be applied during contemplation. During actual practice one is to look at whatever is experienced in terms of these dhammas.3Thus the dhammas mentioned in this satipatthāna are not “mental objects”, but are applied to whatever becomes an object of the mind or of any other sense door during contemplation. The expression “contemplation of dhammas” occurs also in the Ānāpānasati Sutta in relation to the last four of the sixteen steps for developing mindfulness of breathing, which are concerned with contemplating “impermanence”, “fading away”, “cessation”, and “letting go”.4At first sight, the four steps described here appear to be quite different from the mental factors and categories listed under contemplation of dhammas in the Satipatthāna Sutta. The Buddha’s reason for classifying these final four steps of mindfulness of breathing as contemplation of dhammas was that at this more advanced point of practice a meditator will have overcome desires and discontent, thereby becoming established in equanimity.5The commentaries indicate that this is a reference to the removal of the hindrances. [Note 2: Nāņamoli 1995: p.1193 1.157 explains: “in this context dhamma can be understood as comprising all phenomena classified by way of the categories of the Dhamma, the Buddha’s teaching”. Gyori 1996: p.24, in regard to contemplation of dhammas suggests that “the exercises… in this section are specifically intended to invest the mind with a soteriological orientation”. 3 In this context it is noticeable that the instruction for contemplation of dhammas employs the locative case twice, once for dhammas and again for the five hindrances, the five aggregates, etc. Thus one is to “contemplate dhammas in regard to dhammas in regard to the five hindrances, (etc.)”, that is, one contemplates phenomena “in terms of" the categories listed as dhammas. This way of introducing each contemplation differs from the earlier three satipatthānas. Cf. also S V 184, according to which the dhammas contemplated in this satipatthāna are conditionally related to attention, while body is related to nutriment, feelings to contact, and mind to name-and-form. This suggests that contemplation of dhammas requires the deliberate act of directing attention to its objects, in terms of the dhammas listed, to a stronger degree than the other satipatthānas. Carrithers 1983: p.229, explains that “the propositions of doctrine are transmuted into immediate perception, here and now”. Similarly Gombrich 1996: p.36, speaks of learning " to see the world through Buddhist spectacles”; while Gyatso 1992: p.8, suggests: “previously learned categories and skills inform present experience without being recollected as such”. Cf. also Collins 1994: p.78. 4 M III83. 5 M III84.] 7 6 Ps IV 142. And so on. Interesting stuff. SCMatt I think this is an opinion that is pretty common with non-vipassanavādin scholars. Personally, I’ve thought in my own reflections that there could still be some ambiguity or word-play in the terminology though. Something like seeing the Principles/Teachings in the investigation of phenomena. frankk Maybe ‘Teachings’ (with a capital T), or ‘dhamma teachings’ could fit? I that’s a good idea. Or maybe just Dhamma with a capital D. Do you remember off hand what Ven. Analayo translated in 4sp for dhamma? I have the books and can look it up if you don’t. Another idea less subtle than Dhamma: [Buddha’s]-Dhamma (as) [Buddha’s]-Dhamma (he) continuously-sees; (like that he) dwells. Ardent, alert, remembering{what-the-heck-he-should-be-doing-in-this-very-moment-instead-of-living-in-a-fantasy-world}… dhammesu dhamma anu-passi viharati aataapii sampajaano satima… frankk I think this is an opinion that is pretty common with non-vipassanavādin scholars. Is it? Why not B.Bodhi and Ven. Thanissaro then? My guess is that they (Ven. B. and T.) translate Dhamma in the sense “qualities” to be logically consistent with the first 3 of the 4sp, the specific details of how it operates. Teachings as “dhamma” in the 4th is somewhat incoherent if you apply it exactly in the way the first 3 4sp work. But what I’ve found in the EBT is that in the service of making short, repetitive, easy to memorize formulas, sometimes complete logical coherence is violated. Another example, the standard 7sb (awakening factor) formula: sati-sambojjhanga bhaveti: viveka nissitam viraga nissitam nirodha nissitam vossaggaparinamim. (the remaining 6 of 7sb use the same exact refrain). nissitam is usually translated as “dependent on”. but if you think about it, which direction is the dependency? It’s not clear. So I’ve come to realize sometimes a repetitive formula is going to have some parts that aren’t perfectly logical and consistent, but in the service of the oral tradition in making an easy to memorize formula, the Buddha composed it in that way. So in the repetitive 4sp formula, I see the 4th sp as breaking the logical consistency of the first 3. frankk SN 46 is the bodhi-anga awakening factor samyutta, so you can bet the first few suttas in there are probably going to be very important. in the 3rd sutta, here’s the explanation of sati and dhammavicaya. Based on this sutta, Dhamma is not “phenomena” or “qualities”, but is Dhamma-which-leads-to-viraga-and-nibbana. Notice sati “remembers” that teaching, that Dhamma. sati-sam-bojjhanga is equivalent to 4sp, and dhamma in dhamma-vicaya-sambojjhanga is the same Dhamma-teaching in 4sp’s dhamma-anupassana edit: To be more precise, what I assert is “Dhamma” in Dhamma-vicaya and Dhamma-anupassana PRIMARILY means Dhamma-liberative-teaching. Maybe the Buddha intended it to have a secondary meaning of “phenomena/mental qualities”, I’m open to that possibility and would like to see people present some EBT excerpts that support it. (1. Sati) (the beginning of the sutta a monk is inspired listening to a dhamma talk by a senior) So tathā vūpakaṭṭho viharanto He, thus withdrawn, dwelling, taṃ dhammaṃ anus-sarati anu-vitakketi. that Dhamma (he) recollects (and) thinks-over, Yasmiṃ samaye, bhikkhave, bhikkhu on-the occasion, monks, a-monk tathā vūpakaṭṭho viharanto thus withdrawn, dwelling, taṃ dhammaṃ anus-sarati anu-vitakketi, that Dhamma (he) recollects (and) thinks-over, sati-sam-bojjh-aṅgo tasmiṃ samaye mindfulness-awakening-factor on-that occasion bhikkhuno āraddho hoti; (the) monk has-aroused; sati-sam-bojjh-aṅgaṃ tasmiṃ samaye mindfulness-awakening-factor on-that occasion bhikkhu bhāveti; (the) monk develops; sati-sam-bojjh-aṅgo tasmiṃ samaye mindfulness-awakening-factor on-that occasion bhikkhuno bhāvanā-pāripūriṃ gacchati. (the) monk has-developed-(and)-fulfilled *******. (2. Dhamma-vicaya) So tathā sato viharanto He, thus mindfully dwelling, taṃ dhammaṃ paññāya that Dhamma (with) discernment, pa-vicinati pa-vicarati (he) discriminates, (he) evaluates, pari-vīmaṃsam-āpajjati. circumspect-investigation-(he)-enters-upon. Yasmiṃ samaye, bhikkhave, bhikkhu on-the occasion, monks, a-monk tathā sato viharanto thus mindfully dwelling, taṃ dhammaṃ paññāya that Dhamma (with) discernment, pa-vicinati pa-vicarati (he) discriminates, (he) evaluates, pari-vīmaṃsam-āpajjati. circumspect-investigation-(he)-enters-upon. Dhamma-vicaya-sam-bojjh-aṅgo tasmiṃ samaye Dhamma-investigation-awakening-factor on-that occasion bhikkhuno āraddho hoti; (the) monk has-aroused; Dhamma-vicaya-sam-bojjh-aṅgaṃ tasmiṃ samaye Dhamma-investigation-awakening-factor on-that occasion bhikkhu bhāveti; (the) monk develops; Dhamma-vicaya-sam-bojjh-aṅgo tasmiṃ samaye Dhamma-investigation-awakening-factor on-that occasion bhikkhuno bhāvanā-pāripūriṃ gacchati. (the) monk has-developed-(and)-fulfilled *******. Senryu that’s a good idea. Or maybe just Dhamma with a capital D. Do you remember off hand what Ven. Analayo translated in 4sp for dhamma? I have the books and can look it up if you don’t. I just looked it up. For the 4 SP he gives: Body Feelings Mind Dhammas He then splits dhammas into subcategories (you can see all this from the contents page): Dhammas: THE HINDRANCES Dhammas: THE AGGREGATES Dhammas: THE SENSE-SPHERES Dhammas: THE AWAKENING FACTORS Dhammas: THE FOUR NOBLE TRUTHS Leaving it untranslated can be good sometimes, but it is also passing the buck onto the reader. We could just leave it all translated! Sometimes what I like to do for a translation is give both, for example if I were to chose ‘Teachings’ I could put ‘Teachings (dhammā)’ or something like that. And I like the above also, giving the Pāli and then the English for subcategories. Jhāna is a term I much prefer to be left untranslated. Some words are far better to learn in the original, otherwise you get thrown of by translations like ‘meditation’, not knowing which technical term is actually being referred to in the original. But dhamma, I think is often unfair to do that with, since the reader is usually not in a position to understand what it means, due to the many varied meanings of the word dhamma. So I think the translator has a responsibility to find exactly what it does mean in this context, and then convey that to the reader. And if they include the Pāli in brackets or footnotes, all the better! Alternatively leave dhamma in Pāli and put the explanation in brackets or a footnote (hopefully not an endnote, those are so annoying!) [Buddha’s]-Dhamma Still has issues I think. It is Buddha’s phenomena? Or a particular phenomena he discovered (such as the deathless element), so we say it’s his? Or do you mean his teachings? So we are left with confusion. If it is his teachings, then maybe better to simply translate it! frankk Jhāna is a term I much prefer to be left untranslated. Some words are far better to learn in the original, otherwise you get thrown of by translations like ‘meditation’, not knowing which technical term is actually being referred to in the original. exactly. and I totally agree the problem with leaving “Dhamma” untranslated, as Ven. Analayo did. But probably somewhere he defines Dhamma with capital “D” means Teaching. I think most people would figure out Buddha’s Dhamma (Buddha means enlightened or awakened) is a “teachings that lead to liberation”, but I appreciate your well thought out analysis. There is no perfect translation because we’re all biased and imperfect receivers. “principles” makes me think Sir Isaac Newton sitting under an apple treat contemplating gravity is doing Dhamma anupassana. I want to convey it’s not just principles, not just any true teachings, not even the whole handful of leaves, it’s just one leaf that’s the most important leaf at the moment directly impacting you and your urgent need to realize viraga…nirvana. Yasoj Jhāna is a term I much prefer to be left untranslated. I thought about this recently. What I noticed is that the more I advanced in the knowledge of the texts, the more my list of words I would prefer to be untranslated increase, and I suppose that an expert in Pali would prefer to have most of the text left untraslated because he is well aware of all the shortcomings associated with any choosen translations… So now I’m quite ok with translations that translate every words, even the usual culprits (dhamma, Thathagata etc). Senryu exactly. and I totally agree the problem with leaving “Dhamma” untranslated, as Ven. Analayo did. But probably somewhere he defines Dhamma with capital “D” means Teaching. He has a whole chapter on it. So in that context I think it’s fine to leave it untranslated. I think when it comes to just the root text translation, that’s when we need either a translation or a concise explanation in brackets or footnotes. I think most people would figure out Buddha’s Dhamma (Buddha means enlightened or awakened) is a “teachings that lead to liberation”, but I appreciate your well thought out analysis. There is no perfect translation because we’re all biased and imperfect receivers. It also depends on 1) what you’re looking for and why you are looking at the text (which in this case would be the translated text), - such as, are you doing research into ‘dhamma’ meaning ‘phenomena’, or ‘mental phenomena’, or a particular state, for example? If so, leaving it untranslated won’t help this person. And 2) yes, our biases, such as how we usually read the term ‘dhamma’. The translator here has an opportunity to help with both cases. “principles” makes me think Sir Isaac Newton sitting under an apple treat contemplating gravity is doing Dhamma anupassana. Yes I don’t like that. In a different context, Ajahn Sujato uses that for dhammaṭṭhitatā and ‘dhammaniyāmatā’, though qualified as ‘natural principles’: ‘the regularity of natural principles’ and ‘the invariance of natural principles’. I think that’s better than Bodhi’s ‘the stableness of the Dhamma’ and ‘the fixed course of the Dhamma’ which I find thoroughly confusing and potentially very misleading. But I am leaning more to something like ‘the state of things’ and ‘the fixed nature of things’. Or perhaps ‘phenomena’ rather than ‘things’. And maybe ‘natural order’ rather than ‘state’. Such as one of these: ‘the state of the phenomenal’ ‘the natural order of the phenomenal’ ‘the state of phenomena’ ‘the natural order of phenomena’ I want to convey it’s not just principles, not just any true teachings, not even the whole handful of leaves, it’s just one leaf that’s the most important leaf at the moment directly impacting you and your urgent need to realize viraga…nirvana. How about ‘appropriate teaching’, or ‘appropriate skilful teaching’ or something like that? And could make that [appropriate skilful] teaching. Maybe not those exact words if you don’t feel they fit, but there might be a couple you think would. What I noticed is that the more I advanced in the knowledge of the texts, the more my list of words I would prefer to be untranslated increase Ha ha ha, yeah I noticed that happening too :joy: But now that we have this website, I just go to Ajahn Sujato’s parallel translation with the Pāli to locate the sentence I want to know what really says, even if I am working from a different English translation. Very handy! Senryu Bodhi’s Sorry guys I made a mistake in quoting the second of Bodhi’s translations. It’s edited now but in case you read it before I corrected it… You will receive notifications because you created this topic. Suggested Topics Topic Category Replies Activity AN 5.154 difference between Pariyāpuṇāti, dhareti, and relationship to sati? 1 Discussion 6 17h Who’s the boss? appamada and yoniso-manasikara 1 Discussion 7 Dec '16 MN 61 pali missing line of text? 1 Discussion 3 Dec '14 April fools day, april fools life, don’t fall for the FIB 1 Essays 18 11d Forget “mindfulness”. remembering = sati / smṛti / 念 1 Translations 31 Jan 30 There are 268 unread and 8 new topics remaining, or browse other topics in Discussion