Page 1 of 2

A question to Buddhists

Posted: Mon Sep 05, 2016 5:08 pm
by jan Pilo
How would you say
- emptiness, is empty
- form, has form, is formless
?
Possibly other philosophers.

Re: A question to Buddhists

Posted: Mon Sep 05, 2016 6:16 pm
by janKipo
Oh, rats!

Re: A question to Buddhists

Posted: Tue Sep 06, 2016 2:04 am
by janTepanNetaPelin
jan Pilo wrote:How would you say
- emptiness, is empty
- form, has form, is formless
?
Possibly other philosophers. (I know Kipo's opinions and want others to express theirs first and without suggestions.)
Toki!

I would try and use "lupa" as "empty", "hollow". (I try to see "hole" as something "hollow".)
"(outer) form" is "selo" according to the Official Dictionary. "something having form" should therefore be "ijo selo" and something formless should be "ijo pi selo ala".

Regards

Re: A question to Buddhists

Posted: Tue Sep 06, 2016 4:24 pm
by jan Pilo
janKipo wrote:Oh, rats!
... just a little brain storming, not hindered by any authority nor assumptions. There can be many choices, most are good already. However, it's often the good that prevents people from finding better.

Re: A question to Buddhists

Posted: Tue Sep 06, 2016 4:37 pm
by jan Pilo
janTepanNetaPelin wrote:
Toki!

I would try and use "lupa" as "empty", "hollow". (I try to see "hole" as something "hollow".)
"(outer) form" is "selo" according to the Official Dictionary. "something having form" should therefore be "ijo selo" and something formless should be "ijo pi selo ala".

Regards
These are material representations of the ideas or maybe sources of metaphora. I just wonder if the metaphors are typically western.
"something having no content" ("no essence"?)
form as "something being just pure external trait" (?)

Re: A question to Buddhists

Posted: Fri Feb 16, 2018 5:51 am
by janSikisin
What about ale ala? Or is that an illegal construct?

Re: A question to Buddhists

Posted: Fri Feb 16, 2018 10:20 am
by janKipo
It’s legal and means “not everything”, probably not what you were aiming for. Maybe ‘ala ali’ “absolutely nothing”?

Re: A question to Buddhists

Posted: Sat Nov 16, 2019 3:41 pm
by jan Seloki
why not "weka" for empty or emptiness?
for form "selo" is a good translation or maybe "sijelo"(body/form)?
I wouldn't recognize "lupa" as empty if it saw it written, I would think an opening of some kind but I understand what they're getting at.

Re: A question to Buddhists

Posted: Mon Dec 30, 2019 12:05 pm
by janTepanNetaPelin
jan Seloki wrote:why not "weka" for empty or emptiness?
for form "selo" is a good translation or maybe "sijelo"(body/form)?
I wouldn't recognize "lupa" as empty if it saw it written, I would think an opening of some kind but I understand what they're getting at.
"weka" (weka ADJECTIVE absent, away, ignored) doesn't work, because something that is empty can still be there. An empty bottle, for example. But you could say that the innards of the bottle are gone, so "pi insa weka" could work as "empty". (And maybe even "pi insa lupa", but that's up to you.)

mi tawa.

Re: A question to Buddhists

Posted: Sat Feb 29, 2020 5:32 am
by jan Lopata
I think I would riff off 'ijo ala'.

'o kama jo e ijo ala li lon e [insa pi] lawa sina'
Come to have no-thing at [inside of] your mind (imperative):- Empty your mind! (I think - I'm still learning.)

I wonder also whether 'poki' has a role to play here.

'o kama e ni: lawa sina li lon e poki pi ijo ala'
Come to this (imperative): your mind is a vessel of no thing:- let your mind be an empty vessel (again, give or take beginner grammar).