Перевод "ariya-sacca"

Автор Ассаджи, 19:10 11 сентября 2005

« назад - далее »


Будда объясняет значение сложного слова "ария-сачча" в двух суттах.

В Татха сутте он объясняет слово "сачча" через слово "татха":

Цитироватьimāni kho, bhikkhave, cattāri ariyasaccāni tathāni avitathāni anaññathāni; tasmā 'ariyasaccānī'ti vuccanti.

These Four Noble Truths, bhikkhus, are actual, unerring, not otherwise. Therefore they are called noble truths.


В Лока сутте он объясняет слово "ария" как относящееся к Татхагате:

ЦитироватьSadevake loke samārake sabrahmake sassamaṇabrāhmaṇiyā pajāya sadevamanussāya tathāgato ariyo; tasmā 'ariyasaccānī'ti vuccanti.

In this world, with its devas, Mara, and Brahma, in this generation with its ascetics and brahmins, its devas and humans, the Tathagata is the noble one. Therefore they are called noble truths.



Андрей Парибок написал по этому поводу статью:

Study on Conceptual Precision and the Limited Applicability of "Truth", "Theory" and "Practice" to Indian Philosophical Traditions



J David пишет:

Hello Ajahn @Brahmali,
I promised a more complete answer to the following:
Цитата: BrahmaliWell, if paṭipadā and ariyasaccaṃ are nouns in apposition, then you are, in a sense, developing the noble truth, because it is then merely an alternative way of referring to the path. In other words, "developing the path" and "developing the noble truth" would refer to the same thing: "The noble truth, which is the path leading to the end of suffering, is to be developed." (I haven't looked at K.R. Norman's argument. Please let me know if I have missed something here.)
Please excuse my tardiness. I have been reading Norman's paper more carefully. I can now attempt to address your request, for more detail on Norman's paper, The Four Noble Truths.  As L.S. Cousins [Cousins]  remarks, Norman's argument is partly based on the assumptions that (1) all truths were originally expressed in the same way, and (2) that the four truths are true statements about dukkhaṃ, dukkha-samudaya, dukkha-nirodha, and dukkha-nirodha-gāminī paṭipadā.
Norman concludes, through comparative analysis of versions in Pāli and Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit (BHS) that:
Цитата: Norman6.2. The correct form of the NTs in Pali is: idaṃ dukkhaṃ, ayaṃ dukkha-samudayo, ayaṃ dukkha-nirodho, ayaṃ dukkha-nirodha-gāminī patipadā — 'This is pain, this is the origin of pain, this is the cessation of pain, this is the path leading to the cessation of pain".  When the word ariya-saccaṃ is included in the statement, we should translate: "The  NT (that) "This is pain", etc.
Цитата: Norman6.4.  The earliest forms of the  ... 'gerundival'  sets did not include the word ariya-saccaṃ.
Here an item of a 'gerundival' set (in Pāli) has the form taṃ kho pan' idaṃ followed by a short expression of the truth. The items of the 'gerundival' sets occur in pairs. The first item of each pair is followed by a future passive participle (gerundive) stating what should be done about the corresponding truth. The second item is a past participle of the same verb saying what the Buddha has done about it. The short expressions are idaṃ dukkhaṃ ariya-saccaṃ, idaṃ dukkha-samudayaṃ ariya-saccaṃ, idaṃ dukkha-nirodhaṃ ariya-saccam, and idaṃ dukkha-nirodha-gāminī paṭipadā ariya-saccaṃ.
Earlier, in 4.3, Norman agrees with Woodward's omission of ārya-saccaṃ from his translation of the 'gerundival' version of the second NT. He goes on to say, "Woodward did not ... go far enough.  He should have suggested the removal of the word ariya-saccaṃ  from all four items in the 'gerundival' set. In effect, Norman is suggesting removing ariya-saccaṃ from each 'gerundival' item and changing idaṃ to ayaṃ when necessary to agree in gender with the following noun phrase.
Woodward's objection is not the only reason for the removal of ariya-sacca from the "gerundival" set, since ariya-sacca is missing from all "gerundival" items the version he calls lal [SuttaCentral].
Various authors [Cousins, Gethin, Harvey] have observed that sacca in ariya-sacca might mean  "real thing" rather than "truth". If so, since neither dukkha nor dukkha-samudaya are noble, the translation of ariya in each compound needs to be revised to mean "of the noble ones " [Norman2]. Then ariya-sacca  could mean "a real thing known by the noble ones". One could, therefore, let go of theariya-sacca dukkha-samudaya "the origin of truth" without letting go of the truth of what the origin of truth is. But that comes at the cost of an awkward translation.

[Cousins] Cousins, LS., Review of "Pain and its Ending: The Four Noble Truths in the Theravada Buddhist Canon" by Carol S. Anderson (Richmond, Surrey: Curzon Press, 1999), Journal of Buddhist Ethics, Journal of Buddhist Ethics, 8 (2001): 36 - 41
[Gethin], Gethin, Rupert, "The Foundations of Buddhism", Oxford University Press, 1998.
[Harvey] Harvey, Peter, The Four Ariya-saccas as 'True Realities for the Spiritually Ennobled' — the Painful, its Origin, its Cessation, and the Way Going to This — Rather than 'Noble Truths' Concerning These, Buddhist Studies Review, 26.2 (2009) 197–227
[Norman1] Norman, K. R., The Four Noble Truths,
Indological and Buddhist Studies (Volume for J.W. de Jong), K.R. Norman Collected Papers II, pp. 210 — 223, Pali Text Society, Oxford 2003.
[Norman2] Norman, K. R., Why Are the Four Noble Truths Called "Noble"?, Ānanda: Essays in Honour of Ananda W.P. Guruge,   K.R. Norman Collected Papers IV, pp.171 – 174, Pali Text Society, Oxford 2003.