Quote:
It's Pali. The Pali text is in funny lookin' Indian squiggles, so, for example, sankhara looks like सङ्खार, but then the alphabet is used to make it readable, kinda like Japanese has an alphabet version. Pali is no longer a spoken language, though, kinda like Latin is used by the Church but no one actually speaks it. Sankhara means formation but is also regarded as a 'potential'. Paccaya means cause, but the cause of sankhara is volition or kamma. Vinnana(m) means mind,so the underlying meaning of the term regards the volitional generation of formations of mind, loosely translated. The subtlety here is, sankhara can be generated by the volition (which arises in ignorance) as potentials which will inevitably arise as conscious experience at such time when all the conditions for its manifestation come together - this is basically the law of kamma. Hence that second part in the passage regards the very urge to move the mind to the manifestation of thoughts and things. However, the things might not manifest in the immediate term as sankhara really pertains to the potential which destines creation rather than than creation itself, if that makes sense. The dependent origins are not really thought about as linear with one following the other, but as by cyclic and interdependent. It's like the entirety of it arises at once, yet each category generates all the others, pretty much describing the kammic cycle. The reference to ignorance is placed first because it is at the root in the sense that incomplete awareness, misperception, wrong view or unconsciousness, called avijja; and delusion or confusion, called Moha; are the epicentre of every woe, and the insight or realisation is the clarification that resolves it. As Jesus put it "Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free". Ok that's getting into the complexity of the philosophy, so I'll back away slowly now. :icon_eek: |
Quote:
Your Buddhists Wife/Daughter and Family can explain it for you..... It's quite a long story. |
Quote:
To provide such an answer does explain a lot but then you already know that. What you claimed was Pali is actually English. This is a classical error. What was provided was a transliteration - not Pali. As far as I know, transliterations do not get translated. Why would they? When janielee provided this information, the source of where it was gotten should have been provided. The source is https://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebsut057.htm |
Quote:
What language is "sankharapaccaya vinnanam"? It is a transliteration and the language used is English, but then you knew that. This is a classical mistake. It would be interesting to find out how many people actually know what a transliteration is? |
Quote:
It is actually a teaching from Ajahn Sumedho :rolleyes: |
Quote:
If you knew it was English why ask...... Get a Pali-English Dictionary, it might help.... |
Quote:
' Standard Description Avijjapaccaya sankhara, sankharapaccaya vinnanam, .... The above two Pali phrases Imasmim sati, idam hoti, and Imasmim asati, idam ... Note.... Two Pali Phrases..... |
Some very good stuff from that link.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Sorry, so much good stuff.. running would like this :) Quote:
Quote:
Some really good stuff. Thank you for the link :) |
Quote:
Too many times people have claimed on SF a transliteration was the original language. I felt it was about time to see if people really did know the difference. It turned out I was right. |
Quote:
I thought you knew what transliteration is, but I guess not. For example, as you already know: सङ्खार is pali sankhara is the transliteration formation is one of the possible translations |
All times are GMT. The time now is 01:22 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
(c) Spiritual Forums