Astus wrote:OK, then Batcheror's translation is misleading. The reason it was quoted for is its meaning that I think is now clarified.
sorry if I have a hard time conveying what I am trying to say,I have a mild TBI which effects my spelling sentence structure,and for some odd reason gives me the ocd urge to repeat the same sentence twice.
yea I got perplexed cause my quote was in agreement with one of the translations but was not in agreement with the other translation of the same exact quote,and I didn't know which one was the proper translation for comparison.
everything is cleared up now sorry to cause confusion.
as far as the Skandha is the Tathagatagarbha that could go many ways,many quote in the Nirvana sutra say NO way the tathagatagarbha isnt the skandha ...but hints at using them.
most pali say Skandha is not self/suffering..ect so that would lead in the direction of NO.
the last chapter of he Nirvana sutra speaks of the the purified aggregates of the Buddha so that would lean YES (Dr tony page has a video on this topic actually)
Dolpopa held the same view of purified Aggregates as last chapt Nirvana sutra and Dr Tony Page (he also quoted texts to support his position) so that would lean YES
the other view I have heard is that the aggregates of the Buddha are not even the same ones as listed in the suttas/sutra and they are the pure qualities of the Buddha this view is however unsubstantiated.
so 2 for 2 and 1 in between.