Translator Bias

[bodhimind]

Fundamental, we need to ask some questions regarding how Asian literature was also mistranslated. Is it because the western languages are just so inadequate for the task? Or, the western translators so inadequate for the task? Or, is it possible that the Asian religions are no less corrupted than western religions?

I believe that as long as there are scholars who are not mystics with experiential knowledge, then any kind of translation is problematic. I think there is also another problem with the validity of the suttas that were said to be transported out of India into China. Most of these are Mahayanist scriptures, such as the Surangama Sutra, Heart Sutra and Vajracchedika Prajnaparamita Sutra (Diamond).

Perhaps it might be worth looking at the original copies of these Sanskrit texts and seeing if the texts were truly authentic. They had different verbal structures from the original Pali Canon, for example, in the way the Buddha speaks, but this might have been due to the translation into Eastern languages and perhaps distortions in order to fit the culture then.

The Surangama Sutra apparently writes about the various stages of purifying the skandhas. The Heart and Diamond Sutra write about realization of "shi-va" (I believe?), because its texts talk about true emptiness (how void is emptiness and vice versa), which is more than just non-dual awareness. The Diamond Sutra also talks about the elimination of name and form, rites and ritual, intention of reciprocity behind good deeds (sounds like egocentrism), etc - Which sounds a little like the fetters restated in a different way.

I am familiar with an eastern translator of Mahayanist texts and he says that many words are preserved in original Sanskrit, such as samadhi. But I do feel that they might have mixed up "dhyana" and "jhana", because they translate "dhyana" directly as "ch'an" or "zen" or "meditation". Or perhaps that was the initial purpose, to say that when one goes into jhana, one is meditating? I am not too sure about that.

[Jhanananda]

I agree with your take on Mahayanist literature, bodhimind.  It seemed to me that they just rewrote the book to suit themselves, because they did not just add content, but left out critical content, like the 4 sati sutta.  And, Vajrayana just went further in corrupting the dhamma, thus I have dumped both schools of Buddhism, and gone back to the original Pali Canon, which is preserved by Theravada, but none of them seem to know what it means.

[Jhanananda]

I appreciate your insightful comments, Jhananda. You've given us a language of accurate terminology to descibe the religious experience.

You are welcome.

I prefer the term 'ecstasy' over 'samadhi' or even 'jhana' for that matter.

I agree, but the GWV forums all started within a Buddhist context, so we were using Buddhist terminology at the time.  I resorted to Sanskrit and Biblical language to bolster my argument in favor of an ecstatic interpretation of the Pali terms.

I think the use of the term 'concentration' is used by the vast majority of Theravadan teachers/translators because one has to apply and sustain (vitakka and vicara) one's attention on a meditation object before the 1st ecstasy arises. They also very often refer to vitakka and vicara as applied an sustained thought.

Yes, you are correct that most translations of the suttas translate (vitakka and vicara) "as applied an sustained thought."  Whereas, my translation of those two terms is "apply and sustain concentration."

Many teachers refer to this stage as 'access concentration.'

More precisely.  Most Theravadan monks and meditation teachers dismiss most of the phenomena that we speak of here as "merely access concentration;" however, the term does not appear anywhere in the suttas, but does appear in the Vissudhimagga, which seems to be the source of the corrupted interpretation of the suttas.

If I understand correctly, the 1st ecstasy -- arises by itself. By applying and sustaining one's attention on a mediation object, one is simply providing the right conditions for this to happen.

This is a good interpretation of what is going on subjectively when one arrives at the first jhana.  The way I put it is the first jhana arises when we find the practice of meditation is pleasant and desirable.

I agree that the term concentration is a poor choice for categorizing all 8 stages of the religious experience.

Yes, sad, but true.

[Michel]

Thank-you, Jhananda, I very much appreciate your response. It's clear where you stand.