Commentary on SN12.20 (Paccayasutta)

A forum for members who wish to develop a deeper understanding of the Pali Canon and associated Commentaries, which for discussion purposes are both treated as authoritative.

Moderator: Mahavihara moderator

Post Reply
User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 1483
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm

Commentary on SN12.20 (Paccayasutta)

Post by Coëmgenu » Fri Dec 23, 2016 5:09 pm

Does anyone have any links to informed commentary on the Paccayasutta? Or informed commentary in general on this subject matter?

Specifically something that discusses the context and meaning of this line would be ideal:
Uppādā vā tathāgatānaṃ anuppādā vā tathāgatānaṃ, ṭhitāva sā dhātu dhammaṭṭhitatā dhammaniyāmatā idappaccayatā.
whether there is an arising of Tathagatas or no arising of Tathagatas, that element still persists, the stableness of the Dhamma, the fixed course of the Dhamma, specific conditionality.
神足示現者,
世尊隨其所應,而示現入禪定正受,陵虛至東方,作四威儀,
行、住、坐、臥,入火三昧,出種種火光,青、黃、赤、白、
紅、頗梨色,水火俱現, 或身下出火,身上出水,身上出火,
身下出水,周圓四方亦復如是。

santa100
Posts: 2725
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2011 10:55 pm

Re: Commentary on SN12.20 (Paccayasutta)

Post by santa100 » Fri Dec 23, 2016 8:05 pm

Notice the specific context of SN 12.20 is about the 12 links of Dependent Origination. Example:
And what, bhikkhus, is dependent origination? ‘With birth as condition, aging-and-death [comes to be]’: whether there is an arising of Tathāgatas or no arising of Tathāgatas, that element still persists, the stableness of the Dhamma, the fixed course of the Dhamma, specific conditionality.[51] A Tathāgata awakens to this and breaks through to it.[52] Having done so, he explains it, teaches it, proclaims it, establishes it, discloses it, analyses it, elucidates it. And he says: ‘See! With birth as condition, bhikkhus, aging-and-death.’[53]"
And Ven. Bodhi's note:
Note 51 wrote:Ṭhitā va sā dhātu dhammaṭṭhitatā dhammaniyāmatā idappaccayatā . Spk: That element (sā dhātu), the intrinsic nature of the conditions (paccayasabhāva), still persists; never is it the case that birth is not a condition for aging-and-death. By the next two terms too he indicates just the condition. For the dependently arisen phenomena stand because of the condition (paccayena hi paccayuppannā dhammā tiṭṭhanti); therefore the condition itself is called the stableness of the Dhamma (dhammaṭṭhitatā). The condition fixes (or determines) the dependent phenomena (paccayo dhamme niyameti); thus it is called the fixed course of the Dhamma (dhammaniyāmatā). Specific conditionality (idappaccayatā) is the set of specific conditions for aging-and-death, etc.
Spk-pṭ: Whether it is unpenetrated before and after the arising of Tathāgatas, or penetrated when they have arisen, that element still persists; it is not created by the Tathāgatas, but aging-and-death always occurs through birth as its condition. A Tathāgata simply discovers and proclaims this, but he does not invent it.
At AN I 286,8-24 exactly the same statement is made about the three characteristics: “All formations are impermanent /suffering” and “All phenomena are nonself.” The two expressions, dhammaṭṭhitatā dhammaniyāmatā, must thus have a meaning that is common to both dependent origination and the three characteristics, and it therefore seems unfitting to explain them here, as Spk does, in a way that is specifically tied to conditionality. Moreover, it is more likely that here dhamma means the principle or law-fulness that holds sway over phenomena, not the phenomena subject to that principle. See too below n. 105, n. 211.
Note 52&53 wrote:52. Abhisambujjhati abhisameti. The former verb, which is reserved for the Buddha’s enlightenment, is transitive. I thus render it “awakens to (with the object),” though otherwise I generally translate words derived from the verb bujjhati as expressing the sense of “enlightenment.” Abhisameti is the verb corresponding to abhisamaya, on which see n. 13.
53. Se contains a footnote which explains that the statement below, “Thus, bhikkhus, the actuality in this ...” should be inserted at the end of each section on the conditioning relationships; and each following section should begin with the statement, “whether there is an arising of Tathāgatas....”

User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 15202
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: Commentary on SN12.20 (Paccayasutta)

Post by mikenz66 » Fri Dec 23, 2016 8:07 pm


CecilN
Posts: 210
Joined: Sun Dec 25, 2016 9:31 am

Re: Commentary on SN12.20 (Paccayasutta)

Post by CecilN » Mon Dec 26, 2016 7:20 pm

Coëmgenu wrote:Does anyone have any links to informed commentary on the Paccayasutta? Or informed commentary in general on this subject matter?

Specifically something that discusses the context and meaning of this line would be ideal:
Uppādā vā tathāgatānaṃ anuppādā vā tathāgatānaṃ, ṭhitāva sā dhātu dhammaṭṭhitatā dhammaniyāmatā idappaccayatā.
whether there is an arising of Tathagatas or no arising of Tathagatas, that element still persists, the stableness of the Dhamma, the fixed course of the Dhamma, specific conditionality.
This is referring to sabhāva or sādhātu. It is refers to reality that inherently exists independent of cognition or mind. When there are no Buddhas, dependent origination is like the tree that falls in the forest that nobody hears.

Commentary is not required about what is literally spoken. Conditionality, dependent arising (in relation to suffering), impermanence, unsatisfactoriness, not-self & Nibbana exist inherently in a certain way in nature. They are sabhāva or sādhātu, their own nature. The sabhava (inherent nature) of suffering is always dependent origination. When there is suffering, it must arise via dependent origination. When there is no suffering, this happens when there is no dependent origination. Just as the sabhava of water is two parts hydrogen and one part oxygen, so is the sabhava of suffering twelves parts of ignorant phenomena.

User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 1483
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm

Re: Commentary on SN12.20 (Paccayasutta)

Post by Coëmgenu » Mon Dec 26, 2016 7:34 pm

CecilN wrote:Commentary is not required about what is literally spoken.
I don't even know what to say to this. This is like my pastor telling me to "just read" the Bible.

"It says what it says. Anything it appears to say on the surface out of context is definitely what it is saying at all times when the part is compared with the whole."

I just don't/can't agree with that reasoning, sorry. The commentary is there for context. Context is vital. It would be foolish to treat the commentary as "word-of-god", but its just as foolish to throw it out.
神足示現者,
世尊隨其所應,而示現入禪定正受,陵虛至東方,作四威儀,
行、住、坐、臥,入火三昧,出種種火光,青、黃、赤、白、
紅、頗梨色,水火俱現, 或身下出火,身上出水,身上出火,
身下出水,周圓四方亦復如是。

CecilN
Posts: 210
Joined: Sun Dec 25, 2016 9:31 am

Re: Commentary on SN12.20 (Paccayasutta)

Post by CecilN » Tue Dec 27, 2016 6:15 am

Coëmgenu wrote:This is like my pastor telling me to "just read" the Bible.
Exactly. I would advise you to read the Bible (which is very straightforward) rather than read commentaries on the Bible. When Jesus said: "Love neighbour as thyself", "do not murder, do not steal, do not commit adultery, do not lie, do not judge, do not condemn, forgive, give, love others as I have loved you" what more do you need to know?

Similarly, the Buddha taught the laws of dhamma are fixed in their nature (sadhatu or sabhava) independent of cognition. Things are conditioned, impermanent, unsatisfactory & not-self, even if you believe (otherwise) they are created by god, permanent, pleasurable & self.

Why would a commentator know better than the Buddha? A foundation of faith is the Dhamma was well-spoken by the Buddha.
Bhikkhus, the Dhamma well proclaimed by me thus is clear, open, evident, and free of patchwork. MN 22

User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 1483
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm

Re: Commentary on SN12.20 (Paccayasutta)

Post by Coëmgenu » Tue Dec 27, 2016 10:47 pm

CecilN wrote:
Coëmgenu wrote:This is like my pastor telling me to "just read" the Bible.
Exactly. I would advise you to read the Bible (which is very straightforward)
The Bible is neither straightforward nor obvious. If the Bible was straightforward I would be an expert Christian theologian. I am not. Therefore the Bible is not straightforward, nor is it obvious. Neither, I would say, is the Buddhavacana always constantly both straightforward or obvious to a modern reader.

But this is off topic. We can start a new thread if you want addressing if the meaning of the suttas is "straightforward" and obvious.
神足示現者,
世尊隨其所應,而示現入禪定正受,陵虛至東方,作四威儀,
行、住、坐、臥,入火三昧,出種種火光,青、黃、赤、白、
紅、頗梨色,水火俱現, 或身下出火,身上出水,身上出火,
身下出水,周圓四方亦復如是。

santa100
Posts: 2725
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2011 10:55 pm

Re: Commentary on SN12.20 (Paccayasutta)

Post by santa100 » Wed Dec 28, 2016 2:47 am

The suttas aren't always straightforward or obvious, especially to us modern readers. See a simple example here.

User avatar
Javi
Posts: 466
Joined: Thu Nov 22, 2012 5:40 pm
Location: Sacramento, CA

Re: Commentary on SN12.20 (Paccayasutta)

Post by Javi » Thu Dec 29, 2016 2:57 pm

With the commentary it seems to make sense to me. The "law" of patticasamuppada is just something that can be said to be stable.

Of course you wouldn't say that that "law" is some kind of ontological thing, just like you wouldn't say that the laws of physics are some ontological existing thing. It's just that the patterns of causality are repeatedly observed to be stable. You drop a ball again and again and it falls. You observe death again and again and it is conditioned by birth.
Vayadhammā saṅkhārā appamādena sampādethā — All things decay and disappoint, it is through vigilance that you succeed — Mahāparinibbāna Sutta

Self-taught poverty is a help toward philosophy, for the things which philosophy attempts to teach by reasoning, poverty forces us to practice. — Diogenes of Sinope

I have seen all things that are done under the sun, and behold, all is vanity and a chase after wind — Ecclesiastes 1.14

CecilN
Posts: 210
Joined: Sun Dec 25, 2016 9:31 am

Re: Commentary on SN12.20 (Paccayasutta)

Post by CecilN » Thu Dec 29, 2016 5:50 pm

Javi wrote:Of course you wouldn't say that that "law" is some kind of ontological thing...
Is this a crime or sin? What is the relevance of this "ontological thing" to Buddhism?
Javi wrote:just like you wouldn't say that the laws of physics are some ontological existing thing.
Please explain more?
Javi wrote: It's just that the patterns of causality are repeatedly observed to be stable.
But the sutta states the patterns of causality exist independent of observation.
Javi wrote:You drop a ball again and again and it falls. You observe death again and again and it is conditioned by birth.
But the sutta states the patterns of causality exist independent of observation; that is, independent of the enlightenment of a Buddha. When not one person in the universe penetrates the reality of 'not-self' (anatta), everything in the universe is still anatta.

Bakmoon
Posts: 637
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2012 3:14 pm

Re: Commentary on SN12.20 (Paccayasutta)

Post by Bakmoon » Thu Dec 29, 2016 8:08 pm

CecilN wrote:
Javi wrote:Of course you wouldn't say that that "law" is some kind of ontological thing...
Is this a crime or sin? What is the relevance of this "ontological thing" to Buddhism?
Javi wrote:just like you wouldn't say that the laws of physics are some ontological existing thing.
Please explain more?
Javi wrote: It's just that the patterns of causality are repeatedly observed to be stable.
But the sutta states the patterns of causality exist independent of observation.
Javi wrote:You drop a ball again and again and it falls. You observe death again and again and it is conditioned by birth.
But the sutta states the patterns of causality exist independent of observation; that is, independent of the enlightenment of a Buddha. When not one person in the universe penetrates the reality of 'not-self' (anatta), everything in the universe is still anatta.
Javi is saying that dependent origination is not an entity or substance that somehow inheres inside dhammas, but is a description of how dhammas behave. The idea that dependent origination could somehow be an entity or substance is very strange indeed I think, because dependent origination is a set of causal links. If DO were somehow a substance, it would absurdly follow that each dhamma has tucked up inside of it all twelve of the links of DO.
The non-doing of any evil,
The performance of what's skillful,
The cleansing of one's own mind:
This is the Buddhas' teaching.

CecilN
Posts: 210
Joined: Sun Dec 25, 2016 9:31 am

Re: Commentary on SN12.20 (Paccayasutta)

Post by CecilN » Thu Dec 29, 2016 10:54 pm

Bakmoon wrote:dependent origination is not a... substance that somehow inheres inside dhammas, but is a description of how dhammas behave. The idea that dependent origination could somehow be a.... substance is very strange indeed I think, because dependent origination is a set of causal links. If DO were somehow a substance, it would absurdly follow that each dhamma has tucked up inside of it all twelve of the links of DO.
I have never read anything like this before; descriptions of Buddhism that are subservient to concepts found in Western philosophy.

To rephrase: dependent origination is a... lawful process that inheres inside every case of suffering. It is the way suffering always arises rather than a description of how dhammas behave. The idea that dependent origination could somehow be a "description" is very strange indeed I think, because dependent origination is a set of causal links that occur regardless of description. If DO were somehow a description, it would absurdly follow that all twelve of the links of DO would arise only when described.

Bakmoon
Posts: 637
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2012 3:14 pm

Re: Commentary on SN12.20 (Paccayasutta)

Post by Bakmoon » Fri Dec 30, 2016 2:25 am

CecilN wrote:
Bakmoon wrote:dependent origination is not a... substance that somehow inheres inside dhammas, but is a description of how dhammas behave. The idea that dependent origination could somehow be a.... substance is very strange indeed I think, because dependent origination is a set of causal links. If DO were somehow a substance, it would absurdly follow that each dhamma has tucked up inside of it all twelve of the links of DO.
I have never read anything like this before; descriptions of Buddhism that are subservient to concepts found in Western philosophy.

To rephrase: dependent origination is a... lawful process that inheres inside every case of suffering. It is the way suffering always arises rather than a description of how dhammas behave. The idea that dependent origination could somehow be a "description" is very strange indeed I think, because dependent origination is a set of causal links that occur regardless of description. If DO were somehow a description, it would absurdly follow that all twelve of the links of DO would arise only when described.
But that's what laws of nature are, they are descriptions. And descriptions can be valid regardless of whether or not they are recognized. All of the electrons in an atom are distributed in their orbitals in accordance with physical laws, regardless of whether or not you have a scientist observing them, and yet these laws of physics are not some kind of commanding force lording over the electrons barking orders at them, but rather are a description of how electrons behave.

Similarly, DO teaches how suffering arises through causes and conditions, but DO itself is neither an interior controller of dhammas, nor is it a force that causes them to occur in that particular way. DO is a set of principles that tell us how dhammas work.
The non-doing of any evil,
The performance of what's skillful,
The cleansing of one's own mind:
This is the Buddhas' teaching.

CecilN
Posts: 210
Joined: Sun Dec 25, 2016 9:31 am

Re: Commentary on SN12.20 (Paccayasutta)

Post by CecilN » Fri Dec 30, 2016 2:31 am

Bakmoon wrote:But that's what laws of nature are, they are descriptions. And descriptions can be valid regardless of whether or not they are recognized. All of the electrons in an atom are distributed in their orbitals in accordance with physical laws, regardless of whether or not you have a scientist observing them, and yet these laws of physics are not some kind of commanding force lording over the electrons barking orders at them, but rather are a description of how electrons behave.

Similarly, DO teaches how suffering arises through causes and conditions, but DO itself is neither an interior controller of dhammas, nor is it a force that causes them to occur in that particular way. DO is a set of principles that tell us how dhammas work.
I think we should respectfully agree to disagree. The chemicals & other processes currently digesting my lunch are functioning processes. The observing & description of those processes is secondary. The digestion continues according to natural laws. Regards

theY
Posts: 305
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2012 12:07 pm
Contact:

Re: Commentary on SN12.20 (Paccayasutta)

Post by theY » Fri Dec 30, 2016 9:23 pm

I edited your translated text:
Uppādā vā tathāgatānaṃ anuppādā vā tathāgatānaṃ, ṭhitāva sā dhātu dhammaṭṭhitatā dhammaniyāmatā idappaccayatā.
whether there is an arising of Tathagatas or no arising of Tathagatas, that element(=cause) still persists, the stableness-cause (cause of dhamma being) of the Dhamma(=result), the adjudger of the Dhamma (result will being or not is up to cause), specific conditionality.
Commentary of Paccayasutta wrote:uppādā vā tathāgatānanti tathāgatānaṃ uppādepi, buddhesu uppannesu anuppannesupi jātipaccayā jarāmaraṇaṃ, jātiyeva jarāmaraṇassa paccayoฯ ṭhitāva sā dhātūti ṭhitova so paccayasabhāvo, na kadāci jāti jarāmaraṇassa paccayo na hotiฯ dhammaṭṭhitatā dhammaniyāmatāti imehipi dvīhi paccayameva kathetiฯ paccayena hi paccayuppannā dhammā tiṭṭhanti, tasmā paccayova dhammaṭṭhitatāti vuccatiฯ paccayo dhamme niyameti, tasmā dhammaniyāmatāti vuccatiฯ idappaccayatāti imesaṃ jarāmaraṇādīnaṃ paccayā idappaccayā, idappaccayāva idappaccayatāฯ tanti taṃ paccayaṃฯ
ftp://ftp1.puremind.org.tw/01%20%E5%8D% ... 2a-13.html
Translation:

uppādā vā tathāgatānaṃ="From birth as a requisite condition, then aging & death" always going on. No matter what happens, nether universe having this buddha and another buddhas, nor don't having.
ṭhitāva sā dhātu=Cause (paccaya of paccayasamuppanna [result]) still be cause. No time, that birth will not be as a requisite condition of aging & death.
Cause is meaning, of this both words (paccaya): "dhammaṭṭhitatā (cause of result's being) dhammaniyāmatā (adjudger of result's being)". Because paccayuppannadhamma (result) stable (=being) by paccaya (cause), so buddha call paccaya (cause) as "dhammaṭṭhitatā". Because cause [paccaya] adjudge [being of] result (paccayuppanna), so buddha call paccaya (cause) as dhammaniyāmatā.
idappaccayatā=cause(paccaya) of this(=ida=imesaṃ) aging & death. Paccayatā is synonym of paccaya.
taṃ=that paccaya.

Clear! commentary still be the best way to access tipitaka :thumbsup:
Above message maybe out of date. Latest update will be in massage's link.
--------------------------------------------------
Tipitaka memorization is a rule of monks. It isn't just a choice. They must done it.
bahussuto nāma tividho hoti – nissayamuccanako, parisupaṭṭhāpako, bhikkhunovādakoti.
http://UnmixedTheravada.blogspot.com/20 ... monks.html

User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 1483
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm

Re: Commentary on SN12.20 (Paccayasutta)

Post by Coëmgenu » Fri Dec 30, 2016 10:31 pm

theY wrote:I edited your translated text:
Uppādā vā tathāgatānaṃ anuppādā vā tathāgatānaṃ, ṭhitāva sā dhātu dhammaṭṭhitatā dhammaniyāmatā idappaccayatā.
whether there is an arising of Tathagatas or no arising of Tathagatas, that element(=cause) still persists, the stableness-cause (cause of dhamma being) of the Dhamma(=result), the adjudger of the Dhamma (result will being or not is up to cause), specific conditionality.
Commentary of Paccayasutta wrote:uppādā vā tathāgatānanti tathāgatānaṃ uppādepi, buddhesu uppannesu anuppannesupi jātipaccayā jarāmaraṇaṃ, jātiyeva jarāmaraṇassa paccayoฯ ṭhitāva sā dhātūti ṭhitova so paccayasabhāvo, na kadāci jāti jarāmaraṇassa paccayo na hotiฯ dhammaṭṭhitatā dhammaniyāmatāti imehipi dvīhi paccayameva kathetiฯ paccayena hi paccayuppannā dhammā tiṭṭhanti, tasmā paccayova dhammaṭṭhitatāti vuccatiฯ paccayo dhamme niyameti, tasmā dhammaniyāmatāti vuccatiฯ idappaccayatāti imesaṃ jarāmaraṇādīnaṃ paccayā idappaccayā, idappaccayāva idappaccayatāฯ tanti taṃ paccayaṃฯ
ftp://ftp1.puremind.org.tw/01%20%E5%8D% ... 2a-13.html
Translation:

uppādā vā tathāgatānaṃ="From birth as a requisite condition, then aging & death" always going on. No matter what happens, nether universe having this buddha and another buddhas, nor don't having.
ṭhitāva sā dhātu=Cause (paccaya of paccayasamuppanna [result]) still be cause. No time, that birth will not be as a requisite condition of aging & death.
Cause is meaning, of this both words (paccaya): "dhammaṭṭhitatā (cause of result's being) dhammaniyāmatā (adjudger of result's being)". Because paccayuppannadhamma (result) stable (=being) by paccaya (cause), so buddha call paccaya (cause) as "dhammaṭṭhitatā". Because cause [paccaya] adjudge [being of] result (paccayuppanna), so buddha call paccaya (cause) as dhammaniyāmatā.
idappaccayatā=cause(paccaya) of this(=ida=imesaṃ) aging & death. Paccayatā is synonym of paccaya.
taṃ=that paccaya.

Clear! commentary still be the best way to access tipitaka :thumbsup:
So the specific dhātu referred to is paccaya itself? I'm not the most familiar with the linguistic presentation of your commentary translation but it is nice to see commentary in English, I generally find the traditional commentaries hard to come by.
神足示現者,
世尊隨其所應,而示現入禪定正受,陵虛至東方,作四威儀,
行、住、坐、臥,入火三昧,出種種火光,青、黃、赤、白、
紅、頗梨色,水火俱現, 或身下出火,身上出水,身上出火,
身下出水,周圓四方亦復如是。

theY
Posts: 305
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2012 12:07 pm
Contact:

Re: Commentary on SN12.20 (Paccayasutta)

Post by theY » Sat Dec 31, 2016 3:52 am

Coëmgenu wrote:
theY wrote:I edited your translated text:
Uppādā vā tathāgatānaṃ anuppādā vā tathāgatānaṃ, ṭhitāva sā dhātu dhammaṭṭhitatā dhammaniyāmatā idappaccayatā.
whether there is an arising of Tathagatas or no arising of Tathagatas, that element(=cause) still persists, the stableness-cause (cause of dhamma being) of the Dhamma(=result), the adjudger of the Dhamma (result will being or not is up to cause), specific conditionality.
Commentary of Paccayasutta wrote:uppādā vā tathāgatānanti tathāgatānaṃ uppādepi, buddhesu uppannesu anuppannesupi jātipaccayā jarāmaraṇaṃ, jātiyeva jarāmaraṇassa paccayoฯ ṭhitāva sā dhātūti ṭhitova so paccayasabhāvo, na kadāci jāti jarāmaraṇassa paccayo na hotiฯ dhammaṭṭhitatā dhammaniyāmatāti imehipi dvīhi paccayameva kathetiฯ paccayena hi paccayuppannā dhammā tiṭṭhanti, tasmā paccayova dhammaṭṭhitatāti vuccatiฯ paccayo dhamme niyameti, tasmā dhammaniyāmatāti vuccatiฯ idappaccayatāti imesaṃ jarāmaraṇādīnaṃ paccayā idappaccayā, idappaccayāva idappaccayatāฯ tanti taṃ paccayaṃฯ
ftp://ftp1.puremind.org.tw/01%20%E5%8D% ... 2a-13.html
Translation:

uppādā vā tathāgatānaṃ="From birth as a requisite condition, then aging & death" always going on. No matter what happens, nether universe having this buddha and another buddhas, nor don't having.
ṭhitāva sā dhātu=Cause (paccaya of paccayasamuppanna [result]) still be cause. No time, that birth will not be as a requisite condition of aging & death.
Cause is meaning, of this both words (paccaya): "dhammaṭṭhitatā (cause of result's being) dhammaniyāmatā (adjudger of result's being)". Because paccayuppannadhamma (result) stable (=being) by paccaya (cause), so buddha call paccaya (cause) as "dhammaṭṭhitatā". Because cause [paccaya] adjudge [being of] result (paccayuppanna), so buddha call paccaya (cause) as dhammaniyāmatā.
idappaccayatā=cause(paccaya) of this(=ida=imesaṃ) aging & death. Paccayatā is synonym of paccaya.
taṃ=that paccaya.

Clear! commentary still be the best way to access tipitaka :thumbsup:
So the specific dhātu referred to is paccaya itself? I'm not the most familiar with the linguistic presentation of your commentary translation but it is nice to see commentary in English, I generally find the traditional commentaries hard to come by.
"Uppādā vā tathāgatānaṃ anuppādā vā tathāgatānaṃ" = adjective of "dhātu".

"dhātu" = "attano sabhāvaṃ dhārentīti dhātuyoฯ (definition of dhātu is 'thing keep it's own condition[causes and result]. So in this sutta, dhatu refer to 'cause[paccaya]', because it keep it own 'result[paccayasamuppanna]')"

"sa dhātu"="sa paticca" because paticca keep it own paccayasamuppanna.

Example: 'birth' keep it own 'aging & death'. Have not 'birth', have not 'aging & death'.

So buddha said "ṭhitāva sā dhātu dhammaṭṭhitatā dhammaniyāmatā idappaccayatā. "

Bold is cause(paticca). Underline is result (paticcasamuppanna).

----------------------------------------

I am a thai native, thai language is not Indo-European language as pali and english, so my english is terrible.

However youcan ask me all the time. I will try to answer as I can.

Theravada start to learn with memorizing. If you just read, it is absolutely not enough trying to understand theravada-tipitaka.
Above message maybe out of date. Latest update will be in massage's link.
--------------------------------------------------
Tipitaka memorization is a rule of monks. It isn't just a choice. They must done it.
bahussuto nāma tividho hoti – nissayamuccanako, parisupaṭṭhāpako, bhikkhunovādakoti.
http://UnmixedTheravada.blogspot.com/20 ... monks.html

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests