☸Dhamma needs to be left untranslated (continued)

Re: Righting a wrong: ☸Dhamma needs to be left untranslated

• Report this post
• Quote

Post by SarathW » Fri Jun 07, 2019 1:08 pm

I am sympathetic to Frank's suggestion.
However, Buddha said that we should teach Dhamma in the local language.
The problem is not the translation. The problem is that translater not understanding the true meaning of the word s/he translates.
Even if you use the word Dhamma, it is just another word. 

In the local language, Dhamma is Dharma. It's in the Oxford dictionary. It would be hard to find English speakers who don't know these words and their basic definitions:  Buddha, Nirvana, Dharma, Karma, Christ, Mohammed, Christianity.

☸Dharma, dharma

(Oxford English Dictionary, curly brace{} comment added by me)
(1) {Dharma:} (in Indian religion) the eternal and inherent nature of reality, regarded in Hinduism as a cosmic law underlying right behaviour and social order.
(1.1) {☸Dharma:} (in Buddhism) the nature of reality regarded as a universal truth taught by the Buddha; the teaching of Buddhism.
(1.2) {dharma:} An aspect of truth or reality. ‘all dharmas are forms of emptiness’
Origin: Sanskrit, literally ‘decree or custom’.

what pali/sanskrit words have made it into English dictionary?
http://notesonthedhamma.blogspot.com/2019/05/which-palisanskrit-words-have-made-it.html


Sarathw argues that leaving Dharma untranslated (into an English word like teachings, phenomena, according to context), would be ambiguous and confusing.

But that's exactly how the Indians living during the time of the Buddha had to deal with that word. It's a multiplexed, overloaded word, that straddles multiple meanings at the same time, and the listener had to figure out themselves on the spot how to resolve the ambiguity.

So by not translating it, you're going to get an authentic EBT experience exactly like the ancient Indians. Before encountering the Buddha, they had a certain understanding of the definition of Dharma according to their culture and tradition. But after hearing the Buddha use it, they had to figure out the nuances and wrestle with the ambiguity.

In case you haven't noticed, there are many words like that in the EBT, besides "Dhamma". Samādhi is very nuanced and multiplexed, so is sati. Sati means much more than just remembering. When you see/hear the word sati, it also includes sampajano, and the 4sp (satipatthana), and it slurps in all 7sb (awakening factors). Only the sati-indriya definition has the bare raw function of memory/remembering.

There's no reason for B.Bodhi to translate Dhamma into English, given that he already leaves many pali words untranslated, which are not in the Oxford Dictionary and commonly understood by non Buddhist English speakers. Such as Bhante, Bhikkhu, etc.

So there's no downside to what I'm proposing. In fact, it's just insane that there isn't already consensus and immediate unilateral adoption already. Dhamma needs to be untranslated, or translated into the English word, "Dharma". In fact I'm going to start using both of those words interchangeably. If people adopt this convention, then this would do much to alleviate the controversies over the fine nuances of dhamma vs. Dhamma, i.e. whether the primary meaning in a given context is "mental qualities" or "principles" or "teaching", etc. Leave it untranslated and let the listener deal with the ambiguity themselves, the way the Buddha intended.

B. Sujato translates "bhagava" as Buddha, breaking his rule of translating every pali word into English. There's no reason for him to translate nibbana into "extinguishment", when non-buddhist english speakers know the general meaning of "nirvana".

☸Dhamma, dhamma

1. ☸Dhamma = The Buddha's Teaching.
2. Dhamma = Natural laws of the universe, like impermanence, death, illness, etc.
3. dhamma = idea/thought cognizable by the mind (6aya): 💭 manasā dhammaṃ viññāya.
4. dhamma = thing. A broad term that can mean anything.

In more detail.
Dhamma = Buddha's teaching that leads to virāga ... nirvana: Dhamma in this context, as well as in dhamma-vicaya-sambojjhanga, is commonly mistranslated as "phenomena", "mental qualities", etc. 

The oral tradition works together holistically with Sati, dhamma-vicaya, memorization. It requires Dhamma=specialized Teaching, not "phenomena" 
Dharma = Dhamma.
discussion of how translators render Dhamma

How I translate the word "Dhamma":

notice the differentiation between "D" and "d", capital and lower case.
I also add square brackets to add my comments on which of the 4 general categories apply.
For example:
 Dhamma-[teachings],
Dhamma-[teachings & mental qualities],
dhamma-[ideas cognizable by mind]
dhamma-[any thing]

Dhamma as "mental qualities"

Many places in the suttas where translators use "mental qualities", it's not wrong, it's just woefully incomplete and demonstrates the point that by committing to that one specific definition, you've just cut off the important association with Dhamma as "the Buddha's teaching", as well as other meanings it frequently straddles simultaneously such as natural Dhamma laws of the universe.  I translate in those situations as "Dhamma-[teaching & qualities]".

The best way to think of Dhamma in ambiguous multi-straddling situations

Think of it first and foremost as The Buddha's teaching. And then think of the other possible Dhamma meanings that may apply, as subservient helpers to the Buddha's teaching. The Dhamma is always about dukkha and its cessation. When you start giving the word 'dhamma' narrow abhidhamma interpretations, then it loses the connection to that and it can lead to a type of dry insight that doesn't lead to nirvana.

There are only two correct ways to translate the word 'dhamma'

on plurality of dhammā vs dhamma
I haven't read the entire sutta collection in pali, (i've read the entirety in english many times)

but in cases like
kusala dhammā,
akusala dhammā,

this is the prime example of why you must not translate it into a single narrow definition, such as "unskillful qualities".
In doing so, you lose your nirvana compass, since it reduces it to just a morality discrimination that keeps you rebirthing in samsara in good planes of existence, but nevertheless is still dukkha.

The proper way to treat dhammaas in this case, is "skillful Dhamma [teachings of the Buddha, natural laws of the universe like efficacy of dhamma, skillful ethical mental qualities]" etc.
That is, first and foremost we can never lose our ☸Dhamma compass, which points us to Nirvana. Then subservient to that need, the word ☸Dhamma can delegate auxiliary meanings to Dhamma and dhamma to accomplish ☸Dhamma.

For example, if sati recollects the ☸Dhamma (buddha's teaching) of impermanence, it directs us to use that realization to lead to nibbida, viraga, nirodha, nirvana.
But if sati recollects the Dhamma [natural universal observable law] of impermanence, it may very well lead us to a hedonistic reaction of, "oh man, I better grab all the pleasure I can before it disappears!!"

In leaving the word 'dhamma' untranslated, we're doing the Buddha's intention. We're giving the same authentic experience of hearing the word 'dhamma' that his listeners did. They had to figure out the ambiguity and decide which meaning(s) applied.

Once an English translator commits to a single meaning of 'dhamma', then the English reader in many cases can not reverse engineer the english word and realize the original word was 'dhamma'. So in doing so, this can distort Dhamma-teachings grossly.

There's only two correct options:

1. leave 'dhamma' untranslated.
2. pick a single english word that maps to 'dhamma', and use it consistently everywhere. Similar to how people generally translate sati as 'mindfulness' very consistently. B.Bodhi points out Nanamoli tried this already with problematic results.

To solve the ambiguity problem, you can use some combination of parenthesis, footnotes.

But since 'Dharma' is already a commonly understood English word, even though there are two correct options, there's only one sensible option.

A couple of informal proofs :

1. For example, right effort:

anupananam papakanam akusalanam dhammanam
anuppadaya

for unarisen evil un-skillfill Dharmas-[Buddha's teachings],
let them remain unarisen.

since we're talking about akusala Dharma, then in this case it would be non-Dharma that doesn't accord with Buddha's Dharma.
The pali suttas also use 'Dhamma' to refer to teachings of other ascetics, it wasn't exclusively Buddha's teaching.

Here's the proof. Since we're dealing with Buddha's Dharma,
then it would necessarily encompass all kusala/skillful dhamma-[mental qualities] that are associated with it. Which is global and leaves nothing out.

But if you go the other way, and you mapped the dhamma in right effort to 'mental qualities', then you lose the Dhamma compass that leads you to nirvana.

In other words,  Dharma-[buddha's teaching] is a set that includes all kusala dhamma (skillful mental qualities).
But the set of kusala dhamma (skillful mental qualities) does not necessarily contain the Buddha's unique path of liberation that leads to nirvana.


2. How an ancient indian follower of Buddha dealt with the ambiguity of 'dhamma'
Now imagine you're that follower, of the Buddha and you're hearing all the suttas for the first time, and trying to figure out the nuances of dhamma each time.
Sooner or later, your brain is going to optimize the algorithm, where you're going to develop a habit of problem solving that goes like this:

1. check if Buddha-Dharma is the best fit
2. check if Dharma as a natural law of the universe also fits
3. check if dharma as the object of mind (mana) that cognizes (vinnana).
etc...
In other words, in case of ambiguity, you're going to check for best fit in order of importance. Nothing is more important than viraga...Nirvana. Everything else is subservient to that.

Here's a simile to illustrate the point.

Let's say you work in a corporation with 3 level of hierarchy. The big boss is the CEO of the company. Middle management boss is head of your dept.
Your immediate boss is the one you report to.

Your immediate boss gives you an assignment: "Go check with THE BOSS whether we should redesign our product regarding this feature X."

Now which boss does he mean? If you're not sure, in case of doubt, which boss would you talk to first? Maybe they both need to be involved in the discussion. But if you're not sure, then you would check with the BIG BOSS, the CEO of the company first, wouldn't you? If he didn't think he needed to be consulted, then he would refer you to the next level down. But say you chose the other way, you talked to the midlevel manager boss first, who then made a decision, executed it without checking with Big Boss. Then it leads to bad results, Big Boss finds out, demands, "why didn't you consult me first??" You're all FIRED!

So you always check with Big boss first when there is any ambiguity or doubt.
Dharma can always delegate to dharma, but dharma can not delegate to Dharma.

PS

Thanks Mike and other for the useful excerpts from B.Bodhi on their explanations for their dhamma translations, I'll add that to the dhamma page soon:

http://lucid24.org/tped/d/dhamma/ndx/index.html