Pali Term: Idappaccayatā

Explore the ancient language of the Tipitaka and Theravāda commentaries

Moderator: Mahavihara moderator

User avatar
Dmytro
Posts: 1532
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 7:24 pm
Location: Kyiv, Ukraine
Contact:

Pali Term: Idappaccayatā

Post by Dmytro » Tue Oct 19, 2010 8:56 pm

Hello Pali friends,

I'll just repost here the excellent explanation of Ven.Dhammanando at E-Sangha:

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

Idappaccayatā = idaṃ + paccaya + tā.

‘Idaṃ’ means ‘this’, being the neuter nominative or accusative singular of the adjective/pronoun ‘ima’. However, when ‘idaṃ’ occurs in a compound word, with elision of the niggahīta, it may stand for any of the oblique cases of ‘ima’. Here it is understood by the commentators to stand for ‘imesaṃ’, the genitive plural — ‘of these’.

‘Paccaya’ = ‘paccayā’ (nominative plural) — conditions.

The suffix ‘-tā’ forms a noun of state, like the English ‘-ness’.

Literally: “conditions-of-these-ness”.

Intelligibly: “state [of being] the conditions of these”, where ‘these’ denotes old age, sickness, death and all the other items comprehended within the paṭiccasamuppāda formula.

So, that's one commentarial parsing of it. In another, less favoured by English translators, the suffix -tā is treated as redundant and so we get “idappaccayā eva” (“just the conditions of these”).

Maurice Walshe (Long Discourses): “the conditioned nature of things.”
Bodhi/Ñāṇamoli (Connected Discourses, Middle Length Discourses etc.): “specific conditionality.”
U Thittila (Book of Analysis): “specific causality.”
Pe Maung Tin (The Expositor): “specifically assignable causality.”

I think the last one is the best.

More from Pe Maung Tin, in his translation of the Dhammasaṅganī Atthakathā:
‘dvādasapadikaṃ paccayavaṭṭaṃ atthi nu kho natthī’ ti kaṅkhanto __idappaccayatāpaṭiccasamuppannesu dhammesu kaṅkhati_ nāma. tatrāyaṃ vacanattho — imesaṃ jarāmaraṇādīnaṃ paccayā ‘idappaccayā’. idappaccayānaṃ bhāvo ‘idappaccayatā’. idappaccayā eva vā ‘idappaccayatā’ ; jātiādīnametaṃ adhivacanaṃ. jātiādīsu taṃ taṃ paṭicca āgamma samuppannāti ‘paṭiccasamuppannā’. idaṃ vuttaṃ hoti — idappaccayatāya ca paṭiccasamuppannesu ca dhammesu kaṅkhatīti.
(DhsA. 355)

In doubting thus: ‘Is there, or is there not the round of the twelve causes?’ he is said to doubt these causally generated dhammas. Herein the word-definition is: ‘The causes of these dhammas, decay and death etc., are specifically assignable causes.’ ‘Specifically assignable causality’ is the state of such assignable causes. The two expressions are identical, and are synonyms here of birth etc. Birth and the rest of the series are said to be causally generated in the sense ‘come to pass because of, in consequence of.’ Or, he doubts the specifically assignable causation of dhammas which are causally generated.
(Expositor II. 458)

Best wishes,
Dhammanando Bhikkhu

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

Metta, Dmytro

User avatar
Spiny O'Norman
Posts: 851
Joined: Sat May 23, 2009 8:46 am
Location: Suffolk, England

Re: Pali Term: Idappaccayatā

Post by Spiny O'Norman » Thu Oct 21, 2010 11:04 am

Dmytro wrote:
Idappaccayatā = idaṃ + paccaya + tā.
As a general point I'm still not clear about the basic difference between paticcasamupada and idappaccayata, since both appear to be about conditionality. I have an idea that idappaccayata represents the general principle of conditionality, while paticcasamupada is the specific application to dukkha - but is the difference more basic than this?

Spiny

User avatar
Dmytro
Posts: 1532
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 7:24 pm
Location: Kyiv, Ukraine
Contact:

Re: Pali Term: Idappaccayatā

Post by Dmytro » Thu Oct 21, 2010 1:05 pm

Spiny O'Norman wrote:As a general point I'm still not clear about the basic difference between paticcasamupada and idappaccayata, since both appear to be about conditionality.
They reflect the state of things from two sides - paticcasammupadda from the side of things that arise depending on conditions, and idapaccayata from the side of these conditions.

Dmytro

User avatar
Dmytro
Posts: 1532
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 7:24 pm
Location: Kyiv, Ukraine
Contact:

Re: Pali Term: Idappaccayatā

Post by Dmytro » Thu Oct 21, 2010 1:12 pm

Ven.Thanissaro writes:
The Buddha expressed this/that conditionality in a simple-looking formula:

(1) When this is, that is.
(2) From the arising of this comes the arising of that.
(3) When this isn't, that isn't.
(4) From the stopping of this comes the stopping of that.

— AN 10.92

There are many possible ways of interpreting this formula, but only one does justice both to the way the formula is worded and to the complex, fluid manner in which specific examples of causal relationships are described in the Canon. That way is to view the formula as the interplay of two causal principles, one linear and the other synchronic, that combine to form a non-linear pattern. The linear principle — taking (2) and (4) as a pair — connects events, rather than objects, over time; the synchronic principle — (1) and (3) — connects objects and events in the present moment.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/auth ... index.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

However the Pali formula:

imasmi.m sati ida.m hoti;
imassuppaadaa ida.m uppajjati;
imasmi.m asati ida.m na hoti;
imassa nirodhaa ida.m nirujjhati.

is explained in

Dutiya-Ariyasavaka sutta (SN 2.79):

‘imasmi.m sati ida.m hoti, imassuppaadaa ida.m uppajjati. Avijjaaya sati sa"nkhaaraa honti; sa"nkhaaresu sati vi~n~naa.na.m hoti; vi~n~naa.ne sati naamaruupa.m hoti; naamaruupe sati sa.laayatana.m hoti; sa.laayatane sati phasso hoti; phasse sati vedanaa hoti; vedanaaya sati ta.nhaa hoti; ta.nhaaya sati upaadaana.m hoti; upaadaane sati bhavo hoti; bhave sati jaati hoti; jaatiyaa sati jaraamara.na.m hotii’ti.

‘imasmi.m asati ida.m na hoti, imassa nirodhaa ida.m nirujjhati. Avijjaaya asati sa"nkhaaraa na honti; sa"nkhaaresu asati vi~n~naa.na.m na hoti; vi~n~naa.ne asati naamaruupa.m na hoti; naamaruupe asati sa.laayatana.m na hoti …pe… jaatiyaa asati jaraamara.na.m na hotii’ti

It's all the same type of causality, the relationship of requisite condition (paccaya).

User avatar
Spiny O'Norman
Posts: 851
Joined: Sat May 23, 2009 8:46 am
Location: Suffolk, England

Re: Pali Term: Idappaccayatā

Post by Spiny O'Norman » Sat Oct 23, 2010 11:34 am

Dmytro wrote:
Spiny O'Norman wrote:As a general point I'm still not clear about the basic difference between paticcasamupada and idappaccayata, since both appear to be about conditionality.
They reflect the state of things from two sides - paticcasammupadda from the side of things that arise depending on conditions, and idapaccayata from the side of these conditions.

Dmytro
I'm not sure I understand this distinction - aren't both describing the process of conditioned arising?

Spiny

User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
Posts: 19971
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Pali Term: Idappaccayatā

Post by retrofuturist » Sat Oct 23, 2010 11:44 am

Greetings,

Some reflections on alternative translations from venerable Nanananda from http://nidahas.com/2010/09/nanananda-heretic-sage-2/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; ...
I also made a mistake inadvertently when translating: in early editions of The Magic of the Mind I used ‘this/that’ following the standard English translations. That’s com­pletely wrong. It should be ‘this/this’.

In the formula we must take two elements that make a pair and analyse the conditionality between them. ‘That’ implies some thing out side the pair, which is misleading. Paṭiccasamuppāda is to be seen among the elements in a pair. The trick is in the middle; there’s no point in holding on to the ends. And even that middle needs to be let go of, not grasped.
Metta,
Retro. :)
"Do not force others, including children, by any means whatsoever, to adopt your views, whether by authority, threat, money, propaganda, or even education." - Ven. Thich Nhat Hanh

"The uprooting of identity is seen by the noble ones as pleasurable; but this contradicts what the whole world sees." (Snp 3.12)

"One discerns wrong view as wrong view, and right view as right view. This is one's right view." (MN 117)

User avatar
Spiny O'Norman
Posts: 851
Joined: Sat May 23, 2009 8:46 am
Location: Suffolk, England

Re: Pali Term: Idappaccayatā

Post by Spiny O'Norman » Sun Oct 24, 2010 10:59 am

retrofuturist wrote:Greetings,

Some reflections on alternative translations from venerable Nanananda from http://nidahas.com/2010/09/nanananda-heretic-sage-2/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; ...
I also made a mistake inadvertently when translating: in early editions of The Magic of the Mind I used ‘this/that’ following the standard English translations. That’s com­pletely wrong. It should be ‘this/this’.

In the formula we must take two elements that make a pair and analyse the conditionality between them. ‘That’ implies some thing out side the pair, which is misleading. Paṭiccasamuppāda is to be seen among the elements in a pair. The trick is in the middle; there’s no point in holding on to the ends. And even that middle needs to be let go of, not grasped.
Metta,
Retro. :)
Thanks Retro. I think I see what Nanananda is getting at, that conditionality is about the relationship between two elements. However I'm not convinced that "From the arising of this comes the arising of this" conveys it any more clearly than "From the arising of this comes the arising of that."

Spiny

User avatar
Sobeh
Posts: 329
Joined: Tue Mar 16, 2010 3:35 am
Location: Salt Lake City, UT, US
Contact:

Re: Pali Term: Idappaccayatā

Post by Sobeh » Sun Oct 24, 2010 5:42 pm

Spiny O'Norman wrote:However I'm not convinced that "From the arising of this comes the arising of this" conveys it any more clearly than "From the arising of this comes the arising of that."

Spiny
It's actually an essential distinction, thus:

"But, Udāyi, let be the past, let be the future, I shall set you forth the Teaching: When there is this this is, with arising of this this arises; when there is not this this is not, with cessation of this this ceases."

The formula is never conveyed as this/that, only "this/this and not this/not this", for the reason given by Nanananda.

User avatar
Dmytro
Posts: 1532
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 7:24 pm
Location: Kyiv, Ukraine
Contact:

Re: Pali Term: Idappaccayatā

Post by Dmytro » Mon Oct 25, 2010 5:10 pm

Hi Spiny,
Spiny O'Norman wrote:I'm not sure I understand this distinction - aren't both describing the process of conditioned arising?
There are things that arise and there are conditions on which this arising depends.

"Idappaccayatā" refers to the "conditioning" part.

Dmytro

User avatar
Spiny O'Norman
Posts: 851
Joined: Sat May 23, 2009 8:46 am
Location: Suffolk, England

Re: Pali Term: Idappaccayatā

Post by Spiny O'Norman » Tue Oct 26, 2010 11:45 am

Dmytro wrote:Hi Spiny,
Spiny O'Norman wrote:I'm not sure I understand this distinction - aren't both describing the process of conditioned arising?
There are things that arise and there are conditions on which this arising depends.

"Idappaccayatā" refers to the "conditioning" part.

Dmytro
Thanks, but I'm still not getting it. Doesn't the general formula "From the arising of this comes the arising of this/that." include both the condition and the "thing" that arises?
Also, doesn't paticcasamupada include both condition and dependent arising, eg feeling is both a condition for craving and a "result" of contact?

Spiny

User avatar
Spiny O'Norman
Posts: 851
Joined: Sat May 23, 2009 8:46 am
Location: Suffolk, England

Re: Pali Term: Idappaccayatā

Post by Spiny O'Norman » Tue Oct 26, 2010 11:50 am

Sobeh wrote:
Spiny O'Norman wrote:However I'm not convinced that "From the arising of this comes the arising of this" conveys it any more clearly than "From the arising of this comes the arising of that."

Spiny
It's actually an essential distinction, thus:

"But, Udāyi, let be the past, let be the future, I shall set you forth the Teaching: When there is this this is, with arising of this this arises; when there is not this this is not, with cessation of this this ceases."

The formula is never conveyed as this/that, only "this/this and not this/not this", for the reason given by Nanananda.
But doesn't the Pali suggest this/that rather than this/this?

imasmi.m sati ida.m hoti;
imassuppaadaa ida.m uppajjati;
imasmi.m asati ida.m na hoti;
imassa nirodhaa ida.m nirujjhati.

I'm still not clear what's wrong with this/that in a practical sense.

Spiny

User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 16306
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Pali Term: Idappaccayatā

Post by mikenz66 » Tue Oct 26, 2010 10:52 pm

Hi Spiney,

I'm similarly baffled, and I'm sure I'm missing some subtle point. I wondered if it was just a question of whether Pali did not have two different words for "this" and "that". I think that many languages do not. In general many languages have a lot less words than English, so the variety of language we tend to use in English is simply not available.

Like you, I cannot discern any difference in meaning between:
From this [X] this [Y] arises.
From this [X] that [Y] arises.
(Assuming, of course, that Y is not the same as X).

Must be my poor language skills, or it may be that in the Sri Lankan dialect of English there is some distinction, and this is what Ven Nanananda is trying to explain.

I'm actually being serious here - there are significant differences between accepted practise in the various English dialects that exist around the world, despite the quaint idea that some English (or American!) people have that there is one single English dialect...

Mike

User avatar
Dmytro
Posts: 1532
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 7:24 pm
Location: Kyiv, Ukraine
Contact:

Re: Pali Term: Idappaccayatā

Post by Dmytro » Wed Oct 27, 2010 7:13 am

Spiny O'Norman wrote: Thanks, but I'm still not getting it. Doesn't the general formula "From the arising of this comes the arising of this/that." include both the condition and the "thing" that arises?
I have not found in the Sutta any direct link between 'idappaccayatā' and the formula

imasmi.m sati ida.m hoti;
imassuppaadaa ida.m uppajjati;
imasmi.m asati ida.m na hoti;
imassa nirodhaa ida.m nirujjhati.

It seems that Ven.Thanissaro linked them through the word 'idaṃ', and Ven. Ñanananda followed his example.
Also, doesn't paticcasamupada include both condition and dependent arising, eg feeling is both a condition for craving and a "result" of contact?
"Conditionality" and "Conditioned Arising" refer to the same law, but the words are different.
But doesn't the Pali suggest this/that rather than this/this?

imasmi.m sati ida.m hoti;
imassuppaadaa ida.m uppajjati;
imasmi.m asati ida.m na hoti;
imassa nirodhaa ida.m nirujjhati.
As I've said above, this formula is clearly explained in Dutiya-Ariyasavaka sutta (SN 2.79):

‘imasmi.m sati ida.m hoti, imassuppaadaa ida.m uppajjati. Avijjaaya sati sa"nkhaaraa honti; sa"nkhaaresu sati vi~n~naa.na.m hoti; vi~n~naa.ne sati naamaruupa.m hoti; naamaruupe sati sa.laayatana.m hoti; sa.laayatane sati phasso hoti; phasse sati vedanaa hoti; vedanaaya sati ta.nhaa hoti; ta.nhaaya sati upaadaana.m hoti; upaadaane sati bhavo hoti; bhave sati jaati hoti; jaatiyaa sati jaraamara.na.m hotii’ti.

‘imasmi.m asati ida.m na hoti, imassa nirodhaa ida.m nirujjhati. Avijjaaya asati sa"nkhaaraa na honti; sa"nkhaaresu asati vi~n~naa.na.m na hoti; vi~n~naa.ne asati naamaruupa.m na hoti; naamaruupe asati sa.laayatana.m na hoti …pe… jaatiyaa asati jaraamara.na.m na hotii’ti

Dmytro

User avatar
Spiny O'Norman
Posts: 851
Joined: Sat May 23, 2009 8:46 am
Location: Suffolk, England

Re: Pali Term: Idappaccayatā

Post by Spiny O'Norman » Wed Oct 27, 2010 9:39 am

Dmytro wrote:As I've said above, this formula is clearly explained in Dutiya-Ariyasavaka sutta (SN 2.79):

‘imasmi.m sati ida.m hoti, imassuppaadaa ida.m uppajjati. Avijjaaya sati sa"nkhaaraa honti; sa"nkhaaresu sati vi~n~naa.na.m hoti; vi~n~naa.ne sati naamaruupa.m hoti; naamaruupe sati sa.laayatana.m hoti; sa.laayatane sati phasso hoti; phasse sati vedanaa hoti; vedanaaya sati ta.nhaa hoti; ta.nhaaya sati upaadaana.m hoti; upaadaane sati bhavo hoti; bhave sati jaati hoti; jaatiyaa sati jaraamara.na.m hotii’ti.

‘imasmi.m asati ida.m na hoti, imassa nirodhaa ida.m nirujjhati. Avijjaaya asati sa"nkhaaraa na honti; sa"nkhaaresu asati vi~n~naa.na.m na hoti; vi~n~naa.ne asati naamaruupa.m na hoti; naamaruupe asati sa.laayatana.m na hoti …pe… jaatiyaa asati jaraamara.na.m na hotii’ti

Dmytro
Thanks. Do you have a translation of this?

Spiny

User avatar
Spiny O'Norman
Posts: 851
Joined: Sat May 23, 2009 8:46 am
Location: Suffolk, England

Re: Pali Term: Idappaccayatā

Post by Spiny O'Norman » Wed Oct 27, 2010 10:02 am

mikenz66 wrote:Like you, I cannot discern any difference in meaning between:
From this [X] this [Y] arises.
From this [X] that [Y] arises.
(Assuming, of course, that Y is not the same as X).
Yes, I'm also working on the assumption that Y is not the same as X, in which case this/this appears confusing - but I'm also worried that I'm missing a subtle point!
It's beginning to sound like something Nargajuna said.... ;)

Spiny

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests