|
|
Post by laughter on Mar 5, 2021 0:42:48 GMT -5
In my past readings of the DS I've compared these two different versions: (1) seemingly older, native speakers to English (2) more recent, English speaker to English heh heh the Buddha was the first neo-Advaitist.  The DS verses make that distinction between "the thing" and "the idea of the thing" in multiple instances. I found each version to be helpful, for different reasons. I'm interested in what Harris has to say, but, as far as this form of double-negation that he objects to, it's a form that you should be familiar with. I intend to follow inavalen's links, but only after I'm done re-reading those two familiar versions. Wanted to get these examples down now as they occurred to me in the reading: === Unconditional peace is an absence. It's not dependent on the conditions that people need for peace, which is why we call it peace. Any enlightened person will tell you that there's no such thing as an enlightened person. A pointer is a concept, but it can't be understood conceptually, which is why we call it a pointer. The existential truth is ineffable, and can only be pointed to. So, the existential truth is that any statement of the existential truth is not the existential truth. "Since at any point of time and space I can be both the subject and the object of experience, I express it by saying that I am both, and neither, and beyond both." I just read all 3 translations (the one you and Ina linked) up to chapter 6 and I have to say, just judging by content, I am impressed. If you cut out all the filler, the perspective presented there is pretty much to the point and basically identical to what we are mostly talking about here, i.e. impersonal perspective, prior to mind, seeing thru the eyes of Source/CC perspective, the issues with objectifying/thing-ifying etc... Parts of it could actually come straight out of an A-H workshop, hehe. I think it would be worth doing an extra thread on this Diamond Sutra, chapter by chapter, and comparing the different translations, because this is really good and together with the Heart Sutra one of the most referenced texts in Chan/Zen. Thanks for sharing, guys! (** stuffs mouth with a massive handfull of fritos **) |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 5, 2021 8:05:11 GMT -5
... this is the interlinear translation from Greek, and that final " Me" is actually a possessive pronoun, genitive 1st person singular: " mine" ("... if not by mine") ... "my way" biblehub.com/interlinear/john/14-6.htmWow. I'm skeptical that your quick internet search has led to a better translation of Ancient Greek than all the modern Bible translations. But I would be curious to hear from someone who knows Ancient Greek well. I've studied a language where even if something is labeled "genitive" it may not translate as "my/mine". If the mistake I was guessing about occurred, I imagined it occurred in the earliest years, when the story was transmitted orally or maybe in the Aramaic to Greek translation. If it occurs right before our eyes, in the Greek to English translation, that would really be something. That phrase is used to justify a lot of the more messed up aspects of Christianity. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 5, 2021 8:17:37 GMT -5
... this is the interlinear translation from Greek, and that final " Me" is actually a possessive pronoun, genitive 1st person singular: " mine" ("... if not by mine") ... "my way" biblehub.com/interlinear/john/14-6.htmWow. I'm skeptical that your quick internet search has led to a better translation of Ancient Greek than all the modern Bible translations. But I would be curious to hear from someone who knows Ancient Greek well. I've studied a language where even if something is labeled "genitive" it may not translate as "my/mine". If the mistake I was guessing about occurred, I imagined it occurred in the earliest years, when the story was transmitted orally or maybe in the Aramaic to Greek translation. If it occurs right before our eyes, in the Greek to English translation, that would really be something. That phrase is used to justify a lot of the more messed up aspects of Christianity. All new testaments are written in Greek, At the time of Jesus, they were actually speaking in Aramaic but Alexander the great colonized the surrounding area at 300 BC, So all the surrounding areas were greek speaking area, so to evangelize the gospel, people had to write in Greek, so all the books were written in Greek not even single text were written in Aramaic. Only few books of the Old testament(2 books) were written in Aramaic and rest of all old testaments were written in Hebrew. And also at exactly 250 BC, Septuagint Greek translation happened, they have translated all the Hebrew writing of Old testament into Greek. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 5, 2021 10:26:09 GMT -5
Wow. I'm skeptical that your quick internet search has led to a better translation of Ancient Greek than all the modern Bible translations. But I would be curious to hear from someone who knows Ancient Greek well. I've studied a language where even if something is labeled "genitive" it may not translate as "my/mine". If the mistake I was guessing about occurred, I imagined it occurred in the earliest years, when the story was transmitted orally or maybe in the Aramaic to Greek translation. If it occurs right before our eyes, in the Greek to English translation, that would really be something. That phrase is used to justify a lot of the more messed up aspects of Christianity. All new testaments are written in Greek, At the time of Jesus, they were actually speaking in Aramaic but Alexander the great colonized the surrounding area at 300 BC, So all the surrounding areas were greek speaking area, so to evangelize the gospel, people had to write in Greek, so all the books were written in Greek not even single text were written in Aramaic. Only few books of the Old testament(2 books) were written in Aramaic and rest of all old testaments were written in Hebrew. And also at exactly 250 BC, Septuagint Greek translation happened, they have translated all the Hebrew writing of Old testament into Greek. Okay, I didn't know those details, but when I said "Aramaic to Greek translation" I didn't mean that the Gospels were written in Aramaic, just that translation must have occurred at some point. Maybe it occurred as people told the stories orally. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 5, 2021 10:52:54 GMT -5
All new testaments are written in Greek, At the time of Jesus, they were actually speaking in Aramaic but Alexander the great colonized the surrounding area at 300 BC, So all the surrounding areas were greek speaking area, so to evangelize the gospel, people had to write in Greek, so all the books were written in Greek not even single text were written in Aramaic. Only few books of the Old testament(2 books) were written in Aramaic and rest of all old testaments were written in Hebrew. And also at exactly 250 BC, Septuagint Greek translation happened, they have translated all the Hebrew writing of Old testament into Greek. Okay, I didn't know those details, but when I said "Aramaic to Greek translation" I didn't mean that the Gospels were written in Aramaic, just that translation must have occurred at some point. Maybe it occurred as people told the stories orally. Okay. |
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Mar 5, 2021 13:18:51 GMT -5
what is the fascination with really old books? Good question. That's why I enjoy asking people if it's possible for someone living on a desert island without any books or people to find the truth? People who are attached to holy books will refuse to answer the question (or even think about it) because they recognize the threat that such a question presents. |
|
|
|
Post by inavalan on Mar 5, 2021 13:50:07 GMT -5
what is the fascination with really old books? Good question. That's why I enjoy asking people if it's possible for someone living on a desert island without any books or people to find the truth? People who are attached to holy books will refuse to answer the question (or even think about it) because they recognize the threat that such a question presents. I believe that eventually everyone, who can, should put aside all gurus' and dogmas' teachings and tap their own individual inner-source of knowledge and guidance. For most people that seems impossible because of their fear. To me, it is fascinating to look at ancient texts. On one hand you get a glimpse of how people were thinking and a deeper respect for those. On the other hand, it is fascinating to have a glimpse on how ideas got interpreted, and to wonder what is genuine, and what is distorted. Obviously all of us have our blind spots, aren't willing or able to change what we are already believing, and try to fit the old information into our beliefs' mold, to some degree. We'd rather believe that only the interpretations that fit our beliefs are correct, and what is lost too. Still, Troy was located based on oral information. Dwarka and other myths proved to be true. Surely, we can also look at this from the point of view that we create our reality (each one of us), so we find what we look for. I always give a chuckle when somebody's sure they know the truth  , and dismiss others' truths. |
|
|
|
Post by inavalan on Mar 5, 2021 13:55:04 GMT -5
... this is the interlinear translation from Greek, and that final " Me" is actually a possessive pronoun, genitive 1st person singular: " mine" ("... if not by mine") ... "my way" biblehub.com/interlinear/john/14-6.htmWow. I'm skeptical that your quick internet search has led to a better translation of Ancient Greek than all the modern Bible translations. But I would be curious to hear from someone who knows Ancient Greek well. I've studied a language where even if something is labeled "genitive" it may not translate as "my/mine". If the mistake I was guessing about occurred, I imagined it occurred in the earliest years, when the story was transmitted orally or maybe in the Aramaic to Greek translation. If it occurs right before our eyes, in the Greek to English translation, that would really be something. That phrase is used to justify a lot of the more messed up aspects of Christianity. What language is that? Could you give an example? English is a poor language from inflection point of view (not the poorest). Sanskrit is considered to be the most rich in inflections. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Mar 5, 2021 14:10:34 GMT -5
... this is the interlinear translation from Greek, and that final " Me" is actually a possessive pronoun, genitive 1st person singular: " mine" ("... if not by mine") ... "my way" biblehub.com/interlinear/john/14-6.htmWow. I'm skeptical that your quick internet search has led to a better translation of Ancient Greek than all the modern Bible translations. But I would be curious to hear from someone who knows Ancient Greek well. I've studied a language where even if something is labeled "genitive" it may not translate as "my/mine". If the mistake I was guessing about occurred, I imagined it occurred in the earliest years, when the story was transmitted orally or maybe in the Aramaic to Greek translation. If it occurs right before our eyes, in the Greek to English translation, that would really be something. That phrase is used to justify a lot of the more messed up aspects of Christianity. My guess is that you're onto something with your intuition about the quote, and relating it to Niz. There is another Jesus quote where that seems to suggest that as well. Perhaps it was just a mistranslation - it's certainly self-serving for Christian instututions. But, perhaps there's something more going on, as well, and it's not exclusive of these other influences and intentions. If we look at the quote in context, then what is it that Thomas is asking that led to the response? I find the start of the chapter relevant to that question. Honest nonduality speakers will say that there are no gaurantees in seeking the existential truth. What is it that satsang attendee's are looking for, and what is it that the speaker can offer? What is it that someone who goes to a church or a zendo is after, and what is it that the priests can offer? |
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Mar 5, 2021 16:15:35 GMT -5
Good question. That's why I enjoy asking people if it's possible for someone living on a desert island without any books or people to find the truth? People who are attached to holy books will refuse to answer the question (or even think about it) because they recognize the threat that such a question presents. I believe that eventually everyone, who can, should put aside all gurus' and dogmas' teachings and tap their own individual inner-source of knowledge and guidance. For most people that seems impossible because of their fear. I totally agree. People who are willing to suspend all conventional ideas and beliefs (the concensus paradigm), will, if they persist, eventually discover that what they are is one-with the Infinite/Reality/THIS. Everything that is existentially important lies beyond the capacity of the intellect to grasp. |
|
|
|
Post by zazeniac on Mar 5, 2021 19:33:51 GMT -5
I believe that eventually everyone, who can, should put aside all gurus' and dogmas' teachings and tap their own individual inner-source of knowledge and guidance. For most people that seems impossible because of their fear. I totally agree. People who are willing to suspend all conventional ideas and beliefs (the concensus paradigm), will, if they persist, eventually discover that what they are is one-with the Infinite/Reality/THIS. Everything that is existentially important lies beyond the capacity of the intellect to grasp. Yes. THIS defies explanation regardless which Blue Cliff Record translation is correct. But the discussion was fun to read. |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Mar 6, 2021 6:41:43 GMT -5
I found two sites related to the Diamond Sutra, that have a lot of great information.
In Chinese, but easily navigated if your browser does automatic translation (e.g. Chrome): vajraprajnaparamitasutra.blogspot.com/ Comparison of Ten Translations of "Diamond Sutra·Annotation Pian" and New Annotations to Achieve Complete Wisdom and Break the Vajra Method
The comparison of the Chinese version of the "Diamond Sutra" has been studied by scholars and experts, especially in the comparison of "Dove Translation" and "Xuanyi".
The author focuses on the six Chinese translations, three English translations directly translated from Sanskrit texts.
Comparing, and taking the Sanskrit translation of the English version of "Müller" as a benchmark, there will be a little bit of ink if there are obvious differences between the translations.
Scholars have studied the "Gilgit version" and pointed out that this Sanskrit text is closer to the "Dove Translation". This can be seen from the comparison of the contents of "UOslo" and "Gilgit" and "Dove Translation".
In addition, the translation of "Colgate" among the three English translations adopts free translation, which is the so-called free translation, but this translation adds Many translators’ opinions. Therefore, it is only for reference in this book, and if there are big differences, it will be specially pointed out.
Therefore, the comparison of the English version is mainly based on the two versions of "Müller" and "Conze".
An extended list of Buddhist Sutras: www.buddhism.org/Sutras/ Excellent website! Yes, I remember Conze and Müller. I think their translations are pretty solid. They are to Indology what Legge is to Sinology. These guys have all been pioneers in their respective disciplines. They did some great work. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 6, 2021 10:36:46 GMT -5
... Ancient Greek well. I've studied a language where even if something is labeled "genitive" it may not translate as "my/mine". If the ... What language is that? Could you give an example? English is a poor language from inflection point of view (not the poorest). Sanskrit is considered to be the most rich in inflections. I wanted to answer this but without driving this thread off topic. Didn't someone create an off-topic "language" thread a few weeks/months back? I can't find it by navigating from the top of this web site. Maybe there are threads that are not linked from the top? (The language is Russian, and probably some of the related Slavic languages.) |
|
|
|
Post by inavalan on Mar 6, 2021 18:14:52 GMT -5
What language is that? Could you give an example? English is a poor language from inflection point of view (not the poorest). Sanskrit is considered to be the most rich in inflections. I wanted to answer this but without driving this thread off topic. Didn't someone create an off-topic "language" thread a few weeks/months back? I can't find it by navigating from the top of this web site. Maybe there are threads that are not linked from the top? (The language is Russian, and probably some of the related Slavic languages.) Maybe you remember this one: How language shapes the way we think |
|
|
|
Post by zazeniac on Mar 8, 2021 17:03:45 GMT -5
I went to the tennis courts yesterday to figure out how to produce more topspin on my shots. Something I never had trouble with when I played on my college team. It's either the modern rackets or my age. Started playing again a few months ago during the pandemic to keep my mind occupied on more positive things. It started to rain in the midst of my experiments with grips and wrist action. So I gathered up my balls and racket and headed for the car.
Once inside the car, I noticed a wood pecker near an oak tree adjacent to the court. It set an acorn on the ground, then somehow grabbed on to the side of trunk and proceeded to hammer away at it with his beak. It was so beautiful.
Suddenly a Bluejay, also beautiful, landed on the ground under the tree and proceeded to hop toward the wood pecker's acorn, unbeknownst to the hard working wood pecker, he stole the acorn and flew off.
The wood pecker finished his work and went looking for the acorn he had set under the tree. He was hopping around looking for it, distressed. It was interesting to note all the emotions evoked by this little drama. I immediately thought of Laughy and the Trump folk who felt the fruit of their hard labor stolen. Nature doesn't quite live up to our ideals.
|
|
, and dismiss others' truths. 