CJMacie:
re: Dream Walker (5/28/16 10:50 AM as a reply to CJMacie)
Again, from page xxiii (Steve Armstrong's preface):
"In 2000 I learned that Mahasi Sayadaw's comprehensive and authoritative Manual of Insight had never been translated into English."
How did he learn, determine that? Someone told him? Whatever way, it's clearly based in ignorance. Another translation exists, the translator's preface dated April 10,1984. Or is that dating perhaps considered fraudulent?
Yes indeed, it seems there was already a tranlation in English... hmmmm..
Page xxvii:
"This Manual of Insight offers a detailed description of the theory and practice of mindfulness that leads to insight knowledge and the realization of nibbana that is unavailable in contemporary English-language Dhamma writings."
Is that an intentional, or just incidental slight on the extensive writings of, for instance,Thanissaro Bhikkhu, and many others?
Again, I agree, there have been, and are multiple teachers showing the Dhamma, in English, in writing, in full.
"We are grateful for the guidance of the editors at Wisdom who have helped us to strike a happy balance between a very faithful translation of Mahasi Sayadaw's writing in his own voice and smooth readability in English."
This confirms what I've seen so far in textual comparison – the original has been to some extent compromised to suit Western (i.e. IM/VM?) sensibilities. One can't help but notice how, up-front, Sharon Salzberg and Jack Kornfield are prominently quoted in the advertising; and the book's two Forwards, by Joseph Goldstein and Daniel Goleman – the latter (some best-selling psychologist celebrity) sounding quite a mushroomy psychological tone (a perfect example of Than-Geoff's 'Buddhist Romanticism').
Yes, it always gets watered down a little, for example the words jhana and dukkha, in my opinion, have never been translated to English properly, because, in my opinion, there is no single word in English for either jhana or dukkha....
re: Psi (5/28/16 1:18 PM as a reply to Dream Walker; and 5/28/16 10:13 PM as areply to Psi)
"The New Translation is far easier, in my opinion, to understand, and derive Wisdom and Instruction from."
Granted, much "easier" to read, but are the "Wisdom" and "Instruction" from the two versions the same? (A bias perhaps surfacing on my part tothe recurrent theme in secular and pragmatic dharma that there must be an easier, therefore better way… oh well.)
Hmmm, easier perhaps in understanding what has already been understood and experienced.
And, I would like to add , alot of times a deeper level of Dhamma opens up.
So, Easier, may not necessarily be Deeper, as far as Understanding is concerned.
"Yet, it still covers covers the same content. If that makes sense..."
Looks like you might sense the problem also – what makes the content the "same" (other than the original Burmese text) ?
Yeah, it all remains to be seen, it is really all in the practicing. It does seem, from what I can tell initially, that the descriptions of the Dhamma experiences, or rather contemplations, do seem to line up rather well with the experience I have been going through. So there does seem to be a core of Mahasi Sayadaw's thought formations lurking under the Translations, of either rendition being considered.
In other words, Mahasi Sayadaw's teaching seems to come through despite the various translations, but then again, the actual practice goes beyond words, either Burmese or English, at a certain point anyway. At some point on the Path one has to switch the practicing away from just the thought sensations and work at the level of the nerve signals and glandular secretions, sorting even those as to what is skillful and unskillful. So, from that vantage, language does not even work, except in a post hoc fashion anyway. Hope that makes sense.
It is, though, something of a game-change to see the IM/VM (aka mushroom farm) establishment dangling its toes in more "hardcore" dharma. Maybe Daniel's (and others') efforts are getting through?
Yay!?
Or a defensive ploy to maintain authority…

Eww!?

Psi