The Mahaparinirvana Sutra

Discuss and learn about the traditional Mahayana scriptures, without assuming that any one school ‘owns’ the only correct interpretation.
User avatar
DNS
Site Admin
Posts: 5261
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2009 4:23 pm
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, Estados Unidos de América
Contact:

Re: The Mahaparinirvana Sutra

Post by DNS »

Apparently those translations are from:

http://kathodos.com/att.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The main pages on the website are entered by permission only, so went to the who is info:

http://www.whois.com/whois/kathodos.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It is Ken Wheeler of Dark Zen. As my father would say, "consider the source."

Take those translations with a grain of salt or rather a couple of 100kg bags of salt.
Jnana
Posts: 1106
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 12:58 pm

Re: The Mahaparinirvana Sutra

Post by Jnana »

David N. Snyder wrote:Apparently those translations are from:

http://kathodos.com/att.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The main pages on the website are entered by permission only, so went to the who is info:

http://www.whois.com/whois/kathodos.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It is Ken Wheeler of Dark Zen. As my father would say, "consider the source."

Take those translations with a grain of salt or rather a couple of 100kg bags of salt.
Thanks David. That kathodos webpage is an obvious attempt to spread misinformation.
Son of Buddha
Posts: 1123
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2011 6:48 pm

Re: The Mahaparinirvana Sutra

Post by Son of Buddha »

Jnana wrote:
David N. Snyder wrote:Apparently those translations are from:

http://kathodos.com/att.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The main pages on the website are entered by permission only, so went to the who is info:

http://www.whois.com/whois/kathodos.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It is Ken Wheeler of Dark Zen. As my father would say, "consider the source."

Take those translations with a grain of salt or rather a couple of 100kg bags of salt.
Thanks David. That kathodos webpage is an obvious attempt to spread misinformation.

The translations are not from the kathodos webpage,by all means compare them,the translations are different in wording.
Although im pretty sure no matter how much proof is provided no matter how many suttas and commentary texts are qouted you will still wont accept the proof.
Huseng
Former staff member
Posts: 6336
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2010 3:19 pm

Re: The Mahaparinirvana Sutra

Post by Huseng »

Son of Buddha wrote: The translations are not from the kathodos webpage,by all means compare them,the translations are different in wording.
Although im pretty sure no matter how much proof is provided no matter how many suttas and commentary texts are qouted you will still wont accept the proof.
Perhaps you could cite where your translations are coming from?
Son of Buddha
Posts: 1123
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2011 6:48 pm

Re: The Mahaparinirvana Sutra

Post by Son of Buddha »

Huseng wrote:
Son of Buddha wrote: The translations are not from the kathodos webpage,by all means compare them,the translations are different in wording.
Although im pretty sure no matter how much proof is provided no matter how many suttas and commentary texts are qouted you will still wont accept the proof.
Perhaps you could cite where your translations are coming from?

Buddha-nature in the Pali Canon | Randrols Ramblings
randrolsramblings.wordpress.com/.../buddha-nature-in-the-pali-cano...

The Translator is a well known Translator
Douglas Duckworth
their Sanghas Information is listed contacts can be made if you need to do back ground info on said individuals and the information for their Monks is also posted,if anyone needs to talk to the teachers.
(I beleive MR Duckworth is into Shentong True self as is myself,which lead him to obviously look for the teachings in the suttas to confirm an old foundation for such views)

also looking at the kathodos webpage I noticed the translations are different in wording(mainly the sentences are the same it seems however they have replaced (self) with (soul) so these are 2 completely different translations that can be compared.

(sorry I didnt post this earlier I couldnt find the website on Bing,It took me alittle while to realise the search engine needed to be changed to google)

Peace and Love
Huseng
Former staff member
Posts: 6336
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2010 3:19 pm

Re: The Mahaparinirvana Sutra

Post by Huseng »

Son of Buddha wrote: Buddha-nature in the Pali Canon | Randrols Ramblings
randrolsramblings.wordpress.com/.../buddha-nature-in-the-pali-cano...

The Translator is a well known Translator
Douglas Duckworth
their Sanghas Information is listed contacts can be made if you need to do back ground info on said individuals and the information for their Monks is also posted,if anyone needs to talk to the teachers.
(I beleive MR Duckworth is into Shentong True self as is myself,which lead him to obviously look for the teachings in the suttas to confirm an old foundation for such views)
These translations are problematic.

Perhaps you might consider using Access to Insight?

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Son of Buddha
Posts: 1123
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2011 6:48 pm

Re: The Mahaparinirvana Sutra

Post by Son of Buddha »

Huseng wrote: These translations are problematic.
Perhaps you might consider using Access to Insight?

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
how are they problematic?you have 2 different translations by 2 different people saying almost the same exact thing(one useing self the other useing soul)

now I could see it being problematic if these two different translations were completely different from one anouther but they are not.(they seem to be in agreement on everything other that the punchline(self)(soul)
Huseng
Former staff member
Posts: 6336
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2010 3:19 pm

Re: The Mahaparinirvana Sutra

Post by Huseng »

Son of Buddha wrote: how are they problematic?you have 2 different translations by 2 different people saying almost the same exact thing(one useing self the other useing soul)

now I could see it being problematic if these two different translations were completely different from one anouther but they are not.(they seem to be in agreement on everything other that the punchline(self)(soul)

Your selection are clearly aimed at promoting an adharmic view and hence are unacceptable.
Jnana
Posts: 1106
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 12:58 pm

Re: The Mahaparinirvana Sutra

Post by Jnana »

Son of Buddha wrote:The Translator is a well known Translator
Douglas Duckworth
Duckworth says he didn't make those translations. The significant similarities (right down to citation style and number, etc.) strongly suggests that they are merely a slightly reworked version of what is found on that Kathodos webpage. Both versions are seriously flawed to the point that they aren't translations at all. The main error -- which is obviously intentional -- is translating pronouns as if they referred to a metaphysical Self.
Son of Buddha
Posts: 1123
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2011 6:48 pm

Re: The Mahaparinirvana Sutra

Post by Son of Buddha »

Jnana wrote:
Son of Buddha wrote:The Translator is a well known Translator
Douglas Duckworth
Duckworth says he didn't make those translations. The significant similarities (right down to citation style and number, etc.) strongly suggests that they are merely a slightly reworked version of what is found on that Kathodos webpage. Both versions are seriously flawed to the point that they aren't translations at all. The main error -- which is obviously intentional -- is translating pronouns as if they referred to a metaphysical Self.

in the 5 minutes I posted this you have already talked to him??
whats his phone number,have him send me a message.
Huseng
Former staff member
Posts: 6336
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2010 3:19 pm

Re: The Mahaparinirvana Sutra

Post by Huseng »

Jnana wrote:The main error -- which is obviously intentional -- is translating pronouns as if they referred to a metaphysical Self.
I suspected that was the case.

Very intentional mistranslation, unless the author is completely inept.

In any case we should not allow for bogus translations to be passed off as legitimate translations of texts. Everyone can express their opinion on matters, but misrepresenting sutras with false translations is unacceptable.
JKhedrup
Posts: 2328
Joined: Wed May 30, 2012 8:28 am

Re: The Mahaparinirvana Sutra

Post by JKhedrup »

Not to mention negative karma for the person doing it and confusing for those trying to understand the doctrine.
Son of Buddha
Posts: 1123
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2011 6:48 pm

Re: The Mahaparinirvana Sutra

Post by Son of Buddha »

Huseng wrote:
Jnana wrote:The main error -- which is obviously intentional -- is translating pronouns as if they referred to a metaphysical Self.
I suspected that was the case.

Very intentional mistranslation, unless the author is completely inept.

In any case we should not allow for bogus translations to be passed off as legitimate translations of texts. Everyone can express their opinion on matters, but misrepresenting sutras with false translations is unacceptable.

I'm sorry I didnt know they were a bogus translation,I assumed it being on a Sangha website it could be trustworthy.
User avatar
Johnny Dangerous
Global Moderator
Posts: 17089
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 10:58 pm
Location: Olympia WA
Contact:

Re: The Mahaparinirvana Sutra

Post by Johnny Dangerous »

Now I have read this thread, and I am forced to know this "dark zen" exists, thanks alot guys, I should have known better than to look at the website :tantrum: :tantrum:
Meditate upon Bodhicitta when afflicted by disease

Meditate upon Bodhicitta when sad

Meditate upon Bodhicitta when suffering occurs

Meditate upon Bodhicitta when you are scared

-Khunu Lama
cdpatton
Posts: 137
Joined: Mon Jul 05, 2010 5:01 am
Location: California, USA
Contact:

Re: The Mahaparinirvana Sutra

Post by cdpatton »

I am reluctant to announce it - it seems like whenever I do, something happens and I end up on hiatus again - but I've begun to work on my old, ancient, horrible draft of this Sutra from the late 90s and will be posting chunks every other week or so over at my website, dharmatrove.info. I'll be attempting to footnote it thoroughly, so it should be a step over and above the Yamamoto "translation" everyone is struggling with these days. So, far, there is just the beginning of Chapter 1 online. But you can see what I'll doing there.

Charlie.
Dharma Pearls Translation Project

"Supposing is good. But finding out is better." -Mark Twain
Son of Buddha
Posts: 1123
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2011 6:48 pm

Re: The Mahaparinirvana Sutra

Post by Son of Buddha »

cdpatton wrote:I am reluctant to announce it - it seems like whenever I do, something happens and I end up on hiatus again - but I've begun to work on my old, ancient, horrible draft of this Sutra from the late 90s and will be posting chunks every other week or so over at my website, dharmatrove.info. I'll be attempting to footnote it thoroughly, so it should be a step over and above the Yamamoto "translation" everyone is struggling with these days. So, far, there is just the beginning of Chapter 1 online. But you can see what I'll doing there.

Charlie.
Thats good we need more translations,for objective comparrisons,I do feel for you,this sutra is Massive,translating it looks like a nightmare.

Peace and Love
pael
Posts: 558
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2013 12:49 pm

Re: The Mahaparinirvana Sutra

Post by pael »

Mahayana Mahaparinirvana Sutra mention this:
The Buddha said to Kasyapa: "Seven hundred years after my entering Parinirvana, this Marapapiyas will spoil my Wonderful Dharma.
What this means?
May all beings be free from suffering and causes of suffering
User avatar
Wayfarer
Former staff member
Posts: 5150
Joined: Sun May 27, 2012 8:31 am
Location: AU

Re: The Mahaparinirvana Sutra

Post by Wayfarer »

Astus wrote: Mon Jun 04, 2012 7:32 pm
Spirituality wrote:That was way more than necessary, but clear, at least in this translation. You're right: in this translation this sutra does teach Buddha is eternal and is, as such, hard to reconcile with traditional Buddhism.

I'd love to hear what someone with access to the original language who knows something of the Buddhist history of ideas has to say about this text.
Reconcile with which traditional Buddhism? Do you mean Theravada? Just because Mahayana seemingly has many teachings not in accord with Theravada. Otherwise, however, the Nirvana Sutra is a basis of traditional Buddhism, at least in East Asia. The Buddha is eternal. But this eternity is the unborn nature of all, it is the dharmadhatu. In other words, emptiness.
I am preparing a talk on Buddha Nature this Tuesday at Buddhist library Sydney. The audiences are generally small and non-specialists, I certainly don't want to overwhelm them with doctrinal niceties. But it has been edifying, digging into the details of the Buddha-nature teachings. I must confess, I feel an intuitive sympathy with the idea of Buddha Nature.

I have made this comment on the slide I have prepared for this sutra:
This is a controversial text in many eyes because of its apparent exhortation of the ‘true self’ which almost everywhere else in Buddhist texts is identified with the doctrines of Vedanta, who were the traditional antagonists of the Buddhists.

However the Buddhist conception can be differentiated because the ‘true self’ is, in fact, empty of self! There is nothing about it which can be identified as ‘me and mine’. In this sense, it can be said that the true self is actually no self, and that no self is true self. But, this can only be realised by complete giving up of attachment to the idea of self – in other words, by the realisation of Buddha-hood.
Just running this by the learned sangha here as it's a sensitive point.

:namaste:
'Only practice with no gaining idea' ~ Suzuki Roshi
User avatar
Grigoris
Former staff member
Posts: 21938
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 9:27 pm
Location: Greece

Re: The Mahaparinirvana Sutra

Post by Grigoris »

Wayfarer wrote: Sun Nov 25, 2018 8:33 am
Astus wrote: Mon Jun 04, 2012 7:32 pm
Spirituality wrote:That was way more than necessary, but clear, at least in this translation. You're right: in this translation this sutra does teach Buddha is eternal and is, as such, hard to reconcile with traditional Buddhism.

I'd love to hear what someone with access to the original language who knows something of the Buddhist history of ideas has to say about this text.
Reconcile with which traditional Buddhism? Do you mean Theravada? Just because Mahayana seemingly has many teachings not in accord with Theravada. Otherwise, however, the Nirvana Sutra is a basis of traditional Buddhism, at least in East Asia. The Buddha is eternal. But this eternity is the unborn nature of all, it is the dharmadhatu. In other words, emptiness.
I am preparing a talk on Buddha Nature this Tuesday at Buddhist library Sydney. The audiences are generally small and non-specialists, I certainly don't want to overwhelm them with doctrinal niceties. But it has been edifying, digging into the details of the Buddha-nature teachings. I must confess, I feel an intuitive sympathy with the idea of Buddha Nature.

I have made this comment on the slide I have prepared for this sutra:
This is a controversial text in many eyes because of its apparent exhortation of the ‘true self’ which almost everywhere else in Buddhist texts is identified with the doctrines of Vedanta, who were the traditional antagonists of the Buddhists.

However the Buddhist conception can be differentiated because the ‘true self’ is, in fact, empty of self! There is nothing about it which can be identified as ‘me and mine’. In this sense, it can be said that the true self is actually no self, and that no self is true self. But, this can only be realised by complete giving up of attachment to the idea of self – in other words, by the realisation of Buddha-hood.
Just running this by the learned sangha here as it's a sensitive point.

:namaste:
I would recommend you read Dolpopa's "Mountain Dharma" in order to get a good understanding of the Shengtong view of "True Self". I found it rather enlightening and it made it obvious to me that the shentong/rangtong divide does not seem to be really based on anything serious (except maybe a serious misunderstanding of each other's position).
"My religion is not deceiving myself."
Jetsun Milarepa 1052-1135 CE

"Butchers, prostitutes, those guilty of the five most heinous crimes, outcasts, the underprivileged: all are utterly the substance of existence and nothing other than total bliss."
The Supreme Source - The Kunjed Gyalpo
The Fundamental Tantra of Dzogchen Semde
krodha
Posts: 2733
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2011 10:30 pm

Re: The Mahaparinirvana Sutra

Post by krodha »

Malcolm wrote:A couple of observations:

The term "true self" is nowhere used in any Indian or Tibetan Buddhist text, not even in gzhan stong texts.

Even in the Uttaratantra, where we find the Tibetan term, dam pa'i bdag in the discussion of ātmapāramitā, the Sanskrit text simply gives the term as ātma. The "dam pa" was added by Ngog Lotsawa to distinguish this "self," free from the proliferation of the self [i.e. existence] imputed by the hindus and nonself [i.e. nonexistence] imputed by śrāvakas, as a quality of the dharmakāya, — in other words, it is another way of saying the dharmakāya is free from extremes. This usage in the Uttaratantra comes from contrasting the impurity, nonidentity, suffering, and impermanence of compounded phenomena, with the purity, identity, bliss, and permanence of dharmakāya. But if someone should think this contextual usage of "self" with respect to dharmakāya means dharmakāya is an existent self, they have not understood anything of Mahāyāna at all, let alone Dzogchen, or even Buddhadharma for that matter.
Post Reply

Return to “Sūtra Studies”