On translating from Pali K. R.NORMAN | General considerations in translation ‘amlation from one language into another de- yds upon three factors: a would-be translator ‘ast first have a text which he wishes to trans lhe; he must understand the meaning of that ‘ert;he must then transmit that understanding teraaders in another language. The need to have a text to translate is self- cient. By understanding that text we mean ‘iat the translator must not only know what fe words mean, but he must also, to quote a recat writer on the subject, “place the text tuder discussion in its historical context, both ia the broad sense of tracing continuities and d&continuities with the earlier tradition, and ia the narrower sense by sccing how a given tart fits into the larger corpus of its author.” By transmitting we mean that the translator must give that meaning in a readable way, Le. ina style of language which is acceptable to the speakers of that language and intelligible to non- ‘pecalsts, and at the same time reflects all the - 0 that the readers of tanzlation experience the same reactions as tte original hearers or readers. To understand, one must be proficient in the Immguage of the original text. It is not always derstood by readers of many translations fom Oriental languages that the translators itereof often had no formal ring So those . Self-taught, or taught by native eee cer star of proteiency fn tec ing was not necessarily high, they were forced, in the days before such aids as good dictionaries ‘ad grammars in a European language existed, to ‘malate by the “intuitive” method, whereby they examined the context and deduced from ‘tat what the meaning must be. As Professor OFlaherty has stated: “Many of our most ahuble insights into otherwise obscure tems [in the Reveda} have come from scholars who tere seen what the meaning must be from [tbe] ‘antext, from anundentanding of Vedic thought Meesscs."® ‘The wonder is not that thee intuitive translators were sometimes incorrect, ‘but that they were correct so often. It is clear that if the aim of transmission is to convey everything that the original conveyed to its readers, then it is most unlikely, even im- possible, that this should be done perfectly. As Professor Brough has said: “We seck, in fact, the best possible solution which our limitations will allow.” It is obvious that itis difficult for one generation to understand perfectly a text of an cartier generation, for the social and historical backgrounds ofthe two generationsare different, if only to a small extent, It secms likely that each generation would understand a text in the light of their own social and historical back- ground, unless (and perhaps even if) they make an effort to rediscover the background of the origina] hearers" When an attempt ip made io jerstand a text belonging to a gencration which is both eatier and alien, then there is the added difficulty that the gap between the ‘aultural backgrounds may be very great. ‘Attempts made by translators to bridge such ‘gaps in historical and cultural backgrounds some- mes lead to bizarre results. A good example of the danger of taking words out of their cultural background, and explaining them by means of an equivalent in the translator's background, can be seen in MR. Kale’s translation of Kalidasa’s ‘Vikramorvadiya, where the Sanskrit word vimaita is trandated as “balloon”.* Viména is perhaps not easy to transiate, but “flying palace” would not be too wide off the mark.’ Kale, however, ‘conscious of the fact that “flying palace” would ‘mean Little to his contemporary readers in their ‘cultural and historical background, decided to make his translation “up-to-date” in the sense ‘that he not only translated the word, but also translated its cultural background ‘too. Un- fortunately, such a practice necessitates a con- tinual “updating”, as it is always essential to ice an interpretation which accords with the reader's background. : (Just a8 to understand one must be proficient in’ the language from which one is transSating,0, 00, to communicate one mut be proficient in’ the language nto which one is tanslating. If She wishes to translate into English one must write English at a standard which i acceptable To native English speakers. This does not pecesiate being English, because there are those Who are bilingial, and’ speak and write lke a Dative Englshan, although not English. Never Tieles, auch penons are comparatively rare, and fn mut_ fice the fact thet very few one English people ar likely tobe able to wite fault: Eel laced inghh, Dr Schokio ban i fact, ted: “The difeultis for a non-Englch speak {ng individual in rendering Sanckit poetry into English are itspeable.™ "There are ways round this diffalty. Joint works ean be produced, in which one person inaker s prelinhary tranalation, and an English “stylist” produces the final vero, This ‘was done with the tanslation of the Kathivatte sade by Shwe Zan Aung and Mrs Rhys David,” Schokker hind’ made “a tration of the Padattgiaks, in which he tanlsted. from Sancksit into Dutch, and. native English ipeaker then translated” fom” Dutch into English. Theortally this approach tothe pro- ‘lem should have overcome all problems, but the method, although having advanages, is not faulefree. I produced, fer example, such tolecisns ae “olf” for Yoering"in the phrase “umounded by rows which hate settled down when the off war thrown down? beesuse the English trulator had no. knowledge of Sanskat and coud not check agnnst the orsinal while the Dutch tanalator was not sufficiently Competent in Eagish to be abe to empetent in Eo check the 2. Translating from Pali 21 The narure of Patt 1 we now tum tothe problem of producin a English tandadon of @ Pal text can Be teen tat it we dows an exly canon utes Actibed to the Buitha or one of ha dacdice then Cu sim mut be toasca the messing hick, the" text had for thore who heed first uttered, ic. its meaning to the Buddhy contemporaries. We must then transmit this speaning to Engh Pape understood by non-specialists that an carly Pali canonical sutta is itself a translation, ‘and forms which have been left untranslated cx sometimes be seen.?® Although it may y possible to translate such Pai texts into E ‘We must, if our aim is to establish its mea Tor the original hearers, fist find out what uy author actually said, ie, we must “back-tranlate: the text into 2 form of language 2 dose possible to that which we believe was spoke, At the time of the Buddha” This the original form of the text which we wish ig translate, which requires 2 knowledge of te languages of North India and Ceylon at the tine of the Buddha and the centuries immediate after his death. This in turnnecessitatesexpertie not only in the Middle Indo-Aryan languagss,o which Pali is one, but also in classical and Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit, since much of te language of carly Buddhist texts is related tow taken over from Sanskrit, while parallel vesion ‘of many Pali canonical texts exist in Buddha Hybrid Sanskrit. It may be that a wouldbe translator is uw» willing or even unable, to spend time and nergy (on such a major undertaking, and may decide trandate the Pali text “as it stands”. Even tht presents problems, because the canonical Pi texts have been transmitted down to the preset day through a number of traditions, at mes io- Aependent, at times commingled in’a contain, way, so that we now posses: manuscripts, printed editions based upon them, from Barna, Cambodia, Ceylon, Laos, and Thailand, which may well’ all differ in certain respects, whit the editions published by the Pali Text Societ? are of an eclectic nature, being based upot ‘manuscripts and editions from various traditions Al sich traditions should be consulted by any fone wishing to make an accurate text spo? which to base his translation, Ifa translator wishes to simplify his task ovo ‘ore, by restricting himself to cay) the Sinhalest tradition, then his problems are not yet ove since many suttas are found in more than oof place in the canon, and a comparison shows thi! they do not always agree. A trandlator mus decide whether he can ignore such parallel vo sions if they help with the iterpretation of text heis translating. To give a specific example 8 comparison between those verses ascribed 1 the then Valin which ate found in tha," ‘the Samyutta:nikiya! ? and th Suttanipita,!* shows tbat the verses by the hanakas (“reciters")!* of the Sampyut®™fad Khuddakanikiyas do not agree in ev ore aa ‘Valgisa repeated his verses in different ways on Efirent occasions, so that all the various tad. tors are simultancoudly correct. The same may ‘pay to those verses in the Suitanipita which ire variant readings included the ex: sions given in the Niddesa.** Te is possble fist both the text of the Suttanipsta and the rdings given in the Niddesa are equally mihentic. Such a belief, however, presents Seals when we some to cons Bune fos’ commentary!” upon the Sutta-ripit, fecmse he records still more variant readings ‘nd different explanations, showing that in the tadition which he came to Ceylon to consult in e Mahavihara there were ed readings tnd exegesis in addition to those which had been "in the Niddesa tradition. The tatk of Gvelling these problems must be faced before trecan reconstitute the text we wish to translate, If the would-be transator, finally wearied by ‘these problems, states his intention to trans- ie (ony) the Sitinnpita according to Be Sahaleee tradition, without confusing himelf by reference to commentaries and_ parallel werions elsewhere, then he must still decide heh edition he will tanslate, and whether he be influenced in any way by altemative ‘Eatings which may be listed in the footnotes to tat edition, 22 Understanding a Pali text i may be obvious that those who wish to tnasiate Pali text should Gist be competent in Wii, but in fact the school of “intuitive” amlators is no less strong in Pali than in any titer ficld, and many translations have been fale by these without any formal training in the Pall language. Assuming that the wouldbe ‘trnlator is in fact well trained in Pali, then it Imo be stressed that the task of translating i tolves both understanding and cofomonicatng, itis sometimes quite eay to commanicate but rey difficale to understand, i.e. it is cay to trate Af this means simply the giving of an tpivalent. in the second language of phrase whch i linguistically simple, but contextually Sffcult, in’ the fart Language, so. that the renltant “translation” i #0 kinprecise that it ca only be. misleading or completely un- informative, Profesor O'Flaherty has pointed cat the difficulty of understanding the phrase “swe have become immortal” in the Reveda,!* since such a translation gives no hint of the meaning of “immortal” in a particular context. ‘Comparable examples exist in Pali, In the ‘Uraga-sutta of the Suttanipita we find the re- frain s0 bhikkhu johats oraparam wrago jisnam foa tacam purtnom.*? This is very easy to con- vert into English, since the meaning of every ‘word is well known: “‘That monk leaves behind this shore and the far shore as a make leaves behind its old skin” We need, however, to ‘understand what the phrase “this shore and the jeans, In some Pili texts “this shore” means ‘‘ibbdna”” ‘The commentaty upon the Satta-niptta ges a mumber of explnations? because at the tine when the commentator wrote in the fifth century A:D. the idea of leaving be- ‘hind the far shore in the form of wbbana was a Mahtyana idea, which as a Theraiin he was very ‘reluctant to accept. To understand the phrase therefore entails the discussion of the Question whether the Mahayana idea could have Been in existence at the time when the sutta was ‘composed, and, if not, what “far shore” could ‘mean in this contex ‘Similarly, there is a problem in the under. standing of the word amota “not dead” in the Phrase epepur’ ctam matasse dedram,?" which Translated literally means “open ths door of the not dead”, Miss Homer gives two. dightly Gifferent tramations of this phrse in close proximity: “Open this door of deathlessness"™* End “Opened... are the doors of the Death- Jess”? Ttis dear that the nature ofthe problem is very similar to that raised by Professor OvFlaherty with regard tothe meaning of ‘SSmmortal”. We must frst understand the mean ing of amata before we can communicate the meaning to others.** ‘What docs it mean when it issad that a text should be tamslated in the light of its social, historical, and ealtural background? Tn the case fof 2 text ascrbed to the Buddha it means that Wwe ‘must try to reconstitute the social and Cultural background of North India at the time Of the Buddha, which includes trying to find out il that we can bout the other religious teachers fa that area at that me. There isl the problem fof the nature of the Buddhe whos, cultural Background we are aiming to atablish, Binayina schools (and if we are dealing with Pali then We are dealing with a Hinayina schoo!) in- fist upon the thoroughly human character of the Buddha and we should thaefore be con