Dependent origination

[Gem]

Originally Posted by BigJohn

What language is "sankharapaccaya vinnanam"?

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.

[sky]

Originally Posted by BigJohn

When did Pali use Romanized letters?

Your Buddhists Wife/Daughter and Family can explain it for you..... It's quite a long story.

[BigJohn]

Originally Posted by sky123

Your Buddhists Wife/Daughter and Family can explain it for you..... It's quite a long story.

Not really.

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

[BigJohn]

Originally Posted by Gem

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.

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?

[sky]

Originally Posted by BigJohn

Not really.

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

It is actually a teaching from Ajahn Sumedho

[sky]

Originally Posted by BigJohn

Not really.

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

If you knew it was English why ask......

Get a Pali-English Dictionary, it might help....

[sky]

Originally Posted by sky123

If you knew it was English why ask......

Get a Pali-English Dictionary, it might help....

' Standard Description Avijjapaccaya sankhara, sankharapaccaya vinnanam, .... The above two Pali phrases Imasmim sati, idam hoti, and Imasmim asati, idam ...

Note.... Two Pali Phrases.....

[jonesboy]

Some very good stuff from that link.

Some Western Buddhists have proposed that the 'forward' order of Paticca-samuppada can be halted by 'cutting' the process between vedana and tanha. Often I have heard some suggest that rebirth can be avoided through using sati (mindfulness) on vedana to stop it generating tanha and the following factors of Paticca-samuppada. This is, in my understanding, misconceived on two grounds.

....

Secondly, even though vedana does not inevitably produce tanha, because it is not a sufficient condition, it is well stated by The Buddha that only when avijja ceases once and for all does vedana never generate tanha ! This means that one doesn't 'cut' the process using sati on vedana. Sati is not enough. The process stops from the cessation of avijja, as Dependent Cessation makes abundantly clear. The cessation of avijja is much more than the practice of sati.

Dependent Origination, after all, is mainly a process that describes the flow of mental consciousness, and this is fundamentally different from material processes. If one can imagine a beach of white sand, then the stretch looks continuous. On closer examination, though, one finds that the beach is made up of an uncountable number of small grains, each close to the next. If one looks even closer, one discovers that the grains aren't even touching, that each grain is alone. Similarly, when one's mindfulness has been empowered by jhana meditation, one may see the stream of consciousness in much the same way. Before, it looked like a continuous stretch of unbroken cognition. But now it is revealed as granular, tiny moments of consciousness, uncountable in number, close together but not touching, and each one alone. Having seen the true nature of consciousness, only then can one see how one moment of consciousness influences what follows.

The Buddha said to Venerable Ananda at the opening of the Mahnidna Sutta (DN 15): This Dependent Origination, Ananda, is deep and it appears deep.

In my opinion, one needs the experience of jhana to see it clearly.

When The Buddha stated that it is untenable to hold that there is a soul or self (or a God) because a cessation is seen, He explained what He meant as: "From the cessation of delusion, kamma formations cease; from the cessation of kamma formations consciousness ceases ... from the cessation of birth, dukkha ceases" [5]. He was referring to the passing away process called Dependent Cessation. This impersonal process is the very thing that we identify as life. Moreover, it includes all the 'usual suspects' that masquerade as a soul: the body (part of nmarpa), will (part of the kamma formations, sometimes tanha), love (part of the kamma formations and mostly part of updana, clinging), consciousness (vina) and mind (part of salyatana and often equivalent to vina). These usual suspects are clearly seen in the light of Dependent Cessation as transient, insubstantial, granular and fading away soon after they arise. They are all conditioned. They exist only as long as they are supported by their external causes, which are themselves unstable. When the external supporting causes disappear, so do each of the usual suspects. Because these things do not persist, since they do not continue in being, it is untenable to hold that there is a soul, a self or a God.

When The Buddha stated that it is also untenable to maintain that all is pure emptiness, void, nothing, because an arising is seen, He explained what He meant as: "From the arising of delusion, kamma formations arise, from kamma formations arises the stream of consciousness in the next life ... from birth arises dukkha!" He was referring to the arising process called Dependent Origination. Again, this impersonal process includes all that we can know as 'life'. Because this arising is seen, one cannot say they are not. It is not an illusion. These phenomena are real.

Sorry, so much good stuff.. running would like this :)

The Enlightenment experience of The Buddha began with the experience of jhanas. These 'stages of letting go' are also stages of increasing bliss. After jhana, one can reflect on the reason why these jhanas are by far the most pure and powerful happiness of one's life. What is the cause of such happiness? Ajahn Chah used to say that it is like having had a tight rope around one's neck for as long as one can remember. Then one day the rope is suddenly released. The bliss and ease that is felt is because a huge burden of suffering has gone. The ecstasy of jhana is because one has escaped, albeit temporarily, from what people mean by 'the real world'. When The Buddha reflected on jhana, He realized that the real world is suffering, it is a jail, and release from it is bliss. He could only know this once He had stepped out beyond jail. That is one of the purposes of jhana. Jhana is also called vimokkha, which means 'release'.

Even Arahants, Enlightened monks and nuns, experience suffering. They are not released from suffering, they are still in the world, in jail.
..
In the sutta called 'The Dart' (SN 36, 6) suffering is compared to being stabbed with two darts. An Arahant is only stabbed with one dart. The two 'darts' refer to bodily suffering and mental suffering. The Arahant, alone of this world, only experiences bodily suffering.

Some really good stuff.

Thank you for the link :)

[BigJohn]

Originally Posted by sky123

If you knew it was English why ask......

Get a Pali-English Dictionary, it might help....

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.

[BigJohn]

Originally Posted by sky123

' Standard Description Avijjapaccaya sankhara, sankharapaccaya vinnanam, .... The above two Pali phrases Imasmim sati, idam hoti, and Imasmim asati, idam ...

Note.... Two Pali Phrases.....

Those are transliterated expression. That is not Pali.

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