Watch out for the Word Traps!

One of the difficulties we have with Buddhism here in the United States, in my opinion, is language.

As in the case of the lineage of Buddhism that I follow, Vajrayana, its original source is contained in Tibetan texts and transmissions. While there are still limitations and misunderstandings even in Tibetan, the misunderstandings can grow exponentially when the teachings and concepts are translated into another language.

We as practicitioners must be especially careful not to apply “strict” English definitions to critical term translated from Tibetan, Sanskrit, Pali, or other languages. We must take the time to look deeper into what is meant. Why? The translated word can create obstacles, confusion, and resistance to the teachings.

A few examples are helpful. Look at the word “renunciation.” In English, my dictionary says “The act of giving up a right, title, or possession; renouncing.” Further looking at “renouncing.” I find “to declare that one gives up; give up entirely.”

This can be very misleading. Many people ask me about this, especially non-Buddhist practicitioners. They have heard or read that Buddhist renounce the world and everything close to them. Immediately, they find this displeasing and discount Buddhism because of this.

However, the term renunciation is the common translation of two different Tibetan words: (1) nges ‘byung and (2) spang-ba. Most of the time teachers and teachings are referring to nges ‘byung.(pronounce “nejung”) As Khenpo Sonam explained to me, nejung is the mental liberation or transformation to be free from the craving for mundane values including fame, praise, wealth, objects, etc. It is this transformation that results from fully realizing and confirming that these cravings are the source of cyclical existence and suffering. It is not the physical separation from objects, things, and people.

The bottom line is that I can still live in my house, love my wife and children, buy CD’s and still practice nejung. Hearing that we must “renounce” the samsaric world is very different when I realize that they are referring to giving up the craving for mundane values and things. I now understand that they are telling me to give up expectation that the world can provide me with things that will make me happy.

Example 2: A favorite example of mine is the word “love.” As in “I promise to love all sentient beings.” (My wife had a difficult time with this one!-especially being Brasilian).

Most commonly “love” is the translation of the Tibetan term “byams-pa” or “byams pa chen-po” (Great love). In Tibetan this term means the wish for others to enjoy happiness. In the case of Great love (byampa chenpo) it is the altruistic mental attitude to wish all sentient being to enjoy happiness, to be happy.

So looking at what is meant by the Tibetan term byampa, there are two big confusions that we have here. First, it is possible to “love” all beings because it does not mean that we want to sleep with them. It means that we want them to be happy.

Second, it is not possible to love an object under the Tibetan term byampa. We cannot love a house, a job, a picture, etc. in the Tibetan use of the word. It is absurd to think “I want my house to be happy” or “I want that picture to enjoy happiness.”

I will never forget Khenpo Choga Rinpoche laughing with his entire body when someone in a teaching said that they “loved” their new car.
He said “Reeeaaally? You love your car? You want your car to be happy?” and just start to laugh and laugh.

There are many of these misunderstandings and limitations to translations. I do not feel that there is a simple answer to surmounting the errors. Unfortunately for now, I just need to spend time learning the meaning of teachings, deconstruct the terms translated, and not get stuck on the words being used.

Many Dharma Blessings,

Geoff