[Buddha-l] liturgical languages

[Erik Hoogcarspel]

Gary Gach schreef:

>Richard struck a nerve.    
>
> A debt is owed to each new translation which makes an ancient text
>come alive for a new generation (and perhaps future generations),
>including the sutras, the tantras,  the gathas, the chants, etc.
>
>Prothero has suggested the idea of Second Renaissance owing to the
>discovery of Sanskrit and EastAsian; hats off to the
>translator/interpreter/poets to let the words sing.
>
>The language of the sacred is poetry, and vice-versa. 
>
>  
>
This used to be the case before we could write, at the time you couldn't 
remember long texts without metre and rime. But if someone tries to 
construct a poem from an old text, the results are not necessarily 
convincing. I think it's because the lack of freedom, every artistic 
freedom is seen as a sacrilege. I have a remake of the Bhagavad Giita in 
Dutch poetry and  it's terrible and not because of the Dutch this time.
Nevertheless I would like relirap, I smile when I conjure the image of 
Tibetan monks rapping. But not the old texts, new ones.

erik