Is Papanca commentary, identification or both?

On the cultivation of insight/wisdom
User avatar
cjmacie
Posts: 690
Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2012 4:49 am

Re: Is Papanca commentary, identification or both?

Post by cjmacie » Tue Jul 03, 2018 3:23 am

Here's a rather comprehensive, and ostensibly authoritative, overview of the topic:

https://audiodharma.org/series/16/talk/3019/

Two-days of talks on the topic, given in 2012 by Thanissaro Bhikkhu.

"Papañca

When discussing the sources of conflict—inner and outer—the Buddha pointed to a type of thinking he called papañca. This term is often translated as “conceptual proliferation,” but a survey of how it’s discussed in the Pali Canon shows that it has less to do with the amount of thinking and more with the way thinking is framed. This daylong course will focus on understanding what papañca is, how it happens, when it has its uses, and how the need for it can eventually be overcome."

rightviewftw
Posts: 2219
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2018 8:50 pm

Re: Is Papanca commentary, identification or both?

Post by rightviewftw » Sun Jul 22, 2018 5:07 am

DooDoot wrote:
Sun Jul 22, 2018 3:51 am
rightviewftw wrote:
Sun Jul 22, 2018 2:59 am
while i can't comment on the pali and even less the grammar
dvanda compound = two or more members instead of being connected with the participle 'ca' getting joined together and function as copulative compound. Examples nāmarūpaṃ (mentality-materiality); samaṇabrāhmaṇā (ascetics & brahmins)

tappurisa compound = cases where the first member depends on the second (dependent compounds). Example sīlasampanno (perfection of morality); bhikkusaṅgho (community of monks); dukkhasamudayo (arising of suffering); kālaṃkato (end of time)
rightviewftw wrote:
Sun Jul 22, 2018 2:37 am
the statement suggested for translation also makes sense and would seem very reasonable and supported by Sutta thus;
What one perceives, one thinks about. What one thinks about, one objectifies. Based on what a person objectifies, the perceptions & categories of objectification assail him/her with regard to past, present, & future forms cognizable via the eye.
MN 18 is a very good example but this might be against the view of a dvanda compound and might support my considering of a tappurisa compound. Below translations of the compound papañcasaññāsaṅkhā:
Yatonidānaṃ, bhikkhu, purisaṃ papañcasaññāsaṅkhā samudācaranti

Mendicant, a person is beset by concepts of identity that emerge from the proliferation of perceptions. - Sujato

the origin of the number (saṅkhā) of perceptions and obsessions which assail a man - Horner

the source, perceptions and notions [born of] mental proliferation beset a man - Bodhi

the perceptions & categories of objectification assail him/her - Thanissaro

yaṃ vedeti taṃ sañjānāti, yaṃ sañjānāti taṃ vitakketi, yaṃ vitakketi taṃ papañceti

What you feel, you perceive. What you perceive, you think about. What you think about, you proliferate.

yaṃ papañceti tatonidānaṃ purisaṃ papañcasaññāsaṅkhā samudācaranti

What you proliferate about is the source from which a person is beset by concepts of identity that emerge from the proliferation of perceptions. (Sujato)

Based on what a person objectifies, the perceptions & categories of objectification assail him/her (Thanissaro)

what obsesses one is the origin of the number of perceptions and obsessions which assail a man (Horner)

With pananca as source, perceptions and notions [born of] mental proliferation beset a man - Bodhi
:shock:

Bhikkhu Bodhi's footnote says he questionably decided to treat "saññāsaṅkhā" as a dvanda compound thus perceptions and notions.

But Bhikkhu Sujato, has appeared to treat papañcasaññā as a tappurisa compound (although in the reverse order as usually treated) thus proliferation of perceptions; even though in SN 40.1 Sujato treated saññāmanasikārā as a dvanda compound.

I prefer Horner's literal translation. :smile:

Thanks for outlining the various translations and explaining the grammar, friend.
I will think about it tomorrow, i have a question tho;
Instead of;
What one perceives, one thinks about. What one thinks about, one objectifies. Based on what a person objectifies, the perceptions & categories of objectification assail him/her with regard to past, present, & future forms cognizable via the eye.
Would this be acceptable translation? ;
What one perceives, one thinks about. What one thinks about, one conceptualizes. Based on what a person conceptualizes, peripheral concepts & obsessions assail him/her with regard to past, present, & future forms cognizable via the eye.
Last edited by rightviewftw on Sun Jul 22, 2018 5:15 am, edited 1 time in total.
How to meditate: Anapanasati, Satipatthana.
Intro to General Semantics
Factors & Perceptions

Parallel Dhammapada Reading
Chinese to Eng Dhp
"The statements; 'With the remainderless stopping & fading of the six contact-media is it the case that there is anything else?' '.. is it the case that there is not anything else .. is it the case that there both is & is not anything else .. is it the case that there neither is nor is not anything else?' objectify non-objectification. However far the six contact-media go, that is how far objectification goes."

User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 3277
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: Is Papanca commentary, identification or both?

Post by DooDoot » Sun Jul 22, 2018 5:15 am

rightviewftw wrote:
Sun Jul 22, 2018 5:07 am
Would this be acceptable translation? ;
Based on what a person conceptualizes, concepts & obsessions assail him/her with regard to past, present, & future forms cognizable via the eye.
Not really because "sanna" ("perception") is in the last sentence in the Pali.
yaṃ papañceti tatonidānaṃ purisaṃ papañcasaññāsaṅkhā samudācaranti

What you proliferate about is the source from which a person is beset by concepts of identity that emerge from the proliferation of perceptions.
Also, I think "papanca" should be stronger than "conceptualize" because papanca appears "obsessive".

Both Bodhi & Sujato translated saṅkhā as "concepts/notions" therefore your translation could be.
What one perceives, one thinks about. What one thinks about, one obsesses about. Based on what a person obsesses about, perceptions, concepts & obsessions assail him/her with regard to past, present, & future forms cognizable via the eye.

rightviewftw
Posts: 2219
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2018 8:50 pm

Re: Is Papanca commentary, identification or both?

Post by rightviewftw » Sun Jul 22, 2018 5:23 am

DooDoot wrote:
Sun Jul 22, 2018 5:15 am
rightviewftw wrote:
Sun Jul 22, 2018 5:07 am
Would this be acceptable translation? ;
What one perceives, one thinks about. What one thinks about, one conceptualizes. Based on what a person conceptualizes, concepts & obsessions assail him/her with regard to past, present, & future forms cognizable via the eye.
Not really because "sanna" ("perception") is in the last sentence in the Pali.
What one perceives, one thinks about. What one thinks about, one conceptualizes. Based on what a person conceptualizes, derived/related concepts & perceptions assail him/her with regard to past, present, & future forms cognizable via the eye.
Like this? That is pretty much how i understand the meaning of it.

I wonder if the terms "obsession" and "categories" are involved as in categories of being assailed by the agreeable[greed], the disagreeable[anger] or neither agreeable nor disagreeable perceptions, probably not i guess given that the sentences are quite short.
Last edited by rightviewftw on Sun Jul 22, 2018 6:09 am, edited 1 time in total.
How to meditate: Anapanasati, Satipatthana.
Intro to General Semantics
Factors & Perceptions

Parallel Dhammapada Reading
Chinese to Eng Dhp
"The statements; 'With the remainderless stopping & fading of the six contact-media is it the case that there is anything else?' '.. is it the case that there is not anything else .. is it the case that there both is & is not anything else .. is it the case that there neither is nor is not anything else?' objectify non-objectification. However far the six contact-media go, that is how far objectification goes."

User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 3277
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: Is Papanca commentary, identification or both?

Post by DooDoot » Sun Jul 22, 2018 5:31 am

rightviewftw wrote:
Sun Jul 22, 2018 5:23 am
I wonder if the terms "obsession" and "categories" are involved as in categories of being assailed by the agreeable[greed], the disagreeable[anger] or neither agreeable nor disagreeable perceptions, probably not i guess given that the sentences are quite short.
Its a tricky compound. Bhikkhu Bodhi called it "problematic".

There are three words in the compound: papañcasaññāsaṅkhā; that must be translated:

1. papañca

2. saññā

3. saṅkhā

The difficult word is saṅkhā . It seems Horner & Thanissaro have rendered this "categories". I like what you wrote above, to support "categories" of greed, hatred & delusion.

Bodhi made the alternates in his footnote:
Notions [arisen from] the proliferation of perception.

Perceptual notions [arise from] proliferation.

rightviewftw
Posts: 2219
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2018 8:50 pm

Re: Is Papanca commentary, identification or both?

Post by rightviewftw » Sun Jul 22, 2018 6:00 am

pitakele wrote:
Sun Jul 22, 2018 5:42 am
...
Papañcasaññāsankhā is an example of a missaka or complex compound - {mental proliferations and perceptions (copulative compound)} & {many/numerous (probably adjectival compound)}

Personally, I don't think 'attention' is the most suitable translation of manasikāra, 'making in the mind', so am not stuck on it needing to relate to perception/s. For me, more useful translations would be words like 'consideration-deliberation-cogitation'. Thus 'perceptions and considerations accompanied by sensual pleasures beset me' works okay.

Whichever way this compound is translated, it needs to be meaningful throughout AN 9.41 where there are various qualifiers: vitakkasahagatā, upekkhāsahagatā, rūpasahagatā, ākāsānañcāyatanasahagatā, viññāṇañcāyatanasahagatā, ākiñcaññāyatanasahagatā, (nevasaññānāsaññāyatanasahagatā not mentioned)
...
DooDoot wrote:
Sun Jul 22, 2018 5:31 am

The difficult word is saṅkhā . It seems Horner & Thanissaro have rendered this "categories". I like what you wrote above, to support "categories" of greed, hatred & delusion.

Bodhi made the alternates in his footnote:
Notions [arisen from] the proliferation of perception.

Perceptual notions [arise from] proliferation.
i would think that sankha is related to sankhara and thus we literally have something like:
making more of what is made out of the perceived

Thus we get:
What one perceives, one thinks about. What one thinks about, one conceptualizes. Based on what a person conceptualizes, derived[related] concepts & perceptions assail him/her with regard to past, present, & future forms cognizable via the eye.
How to meditate: Anapanasati, Satipatthana.
Intro to General Semantics
Factors & Perceptions

Parallel Dhammapada Reading
Chinese to Eng Dhp
"The statements; 'With the remainderless stopping & fading of the six contact-media is it the case that there is anything else?' '.. is it the case that there is not anything else .. is it the case that there both is & is not anything else .. is it the case that there neither is nor is not anything else?' objectify non-objectification. However far the six contact-media go, that is how far objectification goes."

Dinsdale
Posts: 6135
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
Location: Andromeda looks nice

Re: Is Papanca commentary, identification or both?

Post by Dinsdale » Mon Jul 23, 2018 8:43 am

rightviewftw wrote:
Wed Jun 27, 2018 4:20 pm
i think it would be wrong to say that one perceives "Roses" because it is not the same thing as saying one perceives "Red"
I think the label "Rose" is imputed, based on the perception of a particular combination of colour, shape and smell. None of this is papanca though.
Buddha save me from new-agers!

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 7 guests