Pali Term: Idappaccayatā

Explore the ancient language of the Tipitaka and Theravāda commentaries

Moderator: Mahavihara moderator

User avatar
Dmytro
Posts: 1529
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 7:24 pm
Location: Kyiv, Ukraine
Contact:

Re: Pali Term: Idappaccayatā

Post by Dmytro » Wed Oct 27, 2010 12:03 pm

‘imasmi.m sati ida.m hoti, imassuppaadaa ida.m uppajjati.

"When this is, that is, when this arises, that arises.

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.

When there's ignorance, there are volitions; ... when there's birth, there's aging and death.

‘imasmi.m asati ida.m na hoti, imassa nirodhaa ida.m nirujjhati.

"When this isn't, that isn't, when this ceases, that ceases.

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

When there's no ignorance, there are no volitions; ... when there's no birth, there's no aging and death.

Dmytro

User avatar
Dmytro
Posts: 1529
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 7:24 pm
Location: Kyiv, Ukraine
Contact:

Re: Pali Term: Idappaccayatā

Post by Dmytro » Tue Sep 18, 2012 5:48 am

Dmytro wrote: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).
Very similar explanation is given in Dasabala sutta (SN ii.27):

Dasabalasuttaṃ

21. Sāvatthiyaṃ viharati…pe… ‘‘dasabalasamannāgato, bhikkhave, tathāgato catūhi ca vesārajjehi samannāgato āsabhaṃ ṭhānaṃ paṭijānāti, parisāsu sīhanādaṃ nadati, brahmacakkaṃ pavatteti – iti rūpaṃ iti rūpassa samudayo iti rūpassa atthaṅgamo, iti vedanā iti vedanāya samudayo iti vedanāya atthaṅgamo, iti saññā iti saññāya samudayo iti saññāya atthaṅgamo, iti saṅkhārā iti saṅkhārānaṃ samudayo iti saṅkhārānaṃ atthaṅgamo, iti viññāṇaṃ iti viññāṇassa samudayo iti viññāṇassa atthaṅgamo. Iti imasmiṃ sati idaṃ hoti, imassuppādā idaṃ uppajjati. Imasmiṃ asati idaṃ na hoti, imassa nirodhā idaṃ nirujjhati. Yadidaṃ avijjāpaccayā saṅkhārā; saṅkhārapaccayā viññāṇaṃ…pe… evametassa kevalassa dukkhakkhandhassa samudayo hoti. Avijjāya tveva asesavirāganirodhā saṅkhāranirodho; saṅkhāranirodhā viññāṇanirodho…pe… evametassa kevalassa dukkhakkhandhassa nirodho hotī’’ti.

Sylvester
Posts: 2205
Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2009 9:57 am

Re: Pali Term: Idappaccayatā

Post by Sylvester » Sun Jul 07, 2013 2:39 am

mikenz66 wrote: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
Hi Mike

Thought I'd rake up your old post, given some recent ruminations on the Rebirth thread.

It's true that some translators (eg Ven Nanananda cited) translate the idaṃ in "imasmiṃ sati idaṃ hoti" to read as "this", leading to a very peculiar sentence "When there is this this is".

It's totally unnecessary to be so scrupulous, according to Warder. Many of these Pali pronouns are "deictic", such that although the primary meaning of idaṃ is "this", it can also mean "that", if "that" is part of the discussion. Since idappaccayatā is a summary of the nidānas, and each nidāna is a link between a paccaya and its consequent/effect, the idaṃ (as the consequent) should be given its deictic sense as "that", so that the imasmiṃ (loc of "this") is reserved for the paccaya. The better translation would be the more common one that acknowledges the deictic nature of idaṃ .
Last edited by Sylvester on Sun Jul 07, 2013 4:46 am, edited 1 time in total.

Sylvester
Posts: 2205
Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2009 9:57 am

Re: Pali Term: Idappaccayatā

Post by Sylvester » Sun Jul 07, 2013 4:39 am

Spiny O'Norman wrote:
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
Hi, to add to Dmytro's reply, I would say that this is simply one of the most difficult passages to render into English. I've discussed some of the technicalities in my most recent reply to you in the Rebirth thread. It might be helpful to notice something about the grammar as follows -
Atha kho, bhikkhave, sutavato ariyasāvakassa aparappaccayā ñāṇamevettha hoti – ‘imasmiṃ sati idaṃ hoti, imassuppādā idaṃ uppajjati. (Avijjāya sati saṅkhārā honti; saṅkhāresu sati viññāṇaṃ hoti;) viññāṇe sati nāmarūpaṃ hoti; nāmarūpe sati saḷāyatanaṃ hoti ; saḷāyatane sati phasso hoti; phasse sati vedanā hoti; vedanāya sati taṇhā hoti; taṇhāya sati upādānaṃ hoti; upādāne sati bhavo hoti; bhave sati jāti hoti; jātiyā sati jarāmaraṇaṃ hotī’ti. So evaṃ pajānāti – ‘evamayaṃ loko samudayatī’’’ti.
Each of the clauses rendered in red is a locative absolute construction, ie both the noun and the participle are in the locative case. The issue now is whether this locative absolute is a temporal construction (eg Ven T's and Ven Nanavira's approach) or a causative construction. The grammar does allow for such a locative absolute to carry a temporal sense of simultaneity (ie if the participle were a present participle), but the situations explained as such in Wijesekara's Syntax of the Cases in the Pali Nikayas limit them to sentences comprising adverbial clauses. He gives examples where the LA formed from the participle of an action verb is in the subordinate clause and the primary clause that follows carries another action verb.

However, specifically when it came to 1st and 3rd limbs of idappaccayatā, these do not have any action verbs in them; in place of action verbs, it has a predicate in the subordinate clause and a copula in the primary clause. Wijesekara explains that in this type of idiom, the LA has no temporal value and is a causative construction. He would then translate each of the above LAs as - "when (if, on condition that) there is X, there is Y".

It appears that the Chinese translators of the Agamas were also aware of the causative import of idappaccayatā and therefore translated the 1st limb as either "From this...." or "Because of this....".

What the above sutta seems to be suggesting is that whether one is lensing DO through the 1st limb's perspective, or through the 2nd limb's perspective, it matters not. Both limbs are reducible to the same LA formula outlined in red. It's all about the dependancy of something on its paccaya.

User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 2095
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: Pali Term: Idappaccayatā

Post by DooDoot » Sun Jun 03, 2018 9:12 am

'Idappaccayā' in the following translations of SN 46.4.
Sacepi me cavati, ‘idappaccayā me cavatī’ti pajānāmi … pe …

Whichever [factor of enlightenment] I want to dwell in during the evening, I dwell in that factor of enlightenment during the evening.

If, friends, it occurs to me, ‘Let it be the enlightenment factor of mindfulness,’ it occurs to me, ‘It’s measureless’; it occurs to me, ‘It’s fully perfected.’ While it persists, I understand, ‘It persists. ’ If it abates in me, I understand, ‘It has abated in me for a particular reason.’ …

Bodhi https://legacy.suttacentral.net/en/sn46.4
If the thought occurs to me, ‘mindfulness as a factor for awakening,’ the thought occurs to me, ‘It is immeasurable’; the thought occurs to me, ‘It is well-mastered.’ While it remains, I discern, ‘It remains.’ If it falls away from me, I discern, ‘It has fallen away from me because of this condition.’

Thanissaro https://www.dhammatalks.org/suttas/SN/SN46_4.html
Also in AN 10.61
Mendicants, it is said that no first point of ignorance is evident, before which there was no ignorance, and afterwards it came to be.

Purimā, bhikkhave, koṭi na paññāyati avijjāya: ‘ito pubbe avijjā nāhosi, atha pacchā samabhavī’ti.

And yet it is evident that there is a specific condition for ignorance.

Evañcetaṃ, bhikkhave, vuccati, atha ca pana paññāyati: ‘idappaccayā avijjā’ti

https://suttacentral.net/an10.61/en/sujato
Importantly in MN 26:
But people like attachment, they love it and enjoy it.

Ālayarāmā kho panāyaṃ pajā ālayaratā ālayasammuditā.

It’s hard for them to see this thing; that is, specific conditionality, dependent origination.

Ālayarāmāya kho pana pajāya ālayaratāya ālayasammuditāya duddasaṃ idaṃ ṭhānaṃ yadidaṃ—idappaccayatā paṭiccasamuppādo

Sujato https://suttacentral.net/mn26/en/sujato
But this generation delights in attachment, takes delight in attachment, rejoices in attachment. It is hard for such a generation to see this truth, namely, specific conditionality, dependent origination.

Bodhi https://legacy.suttacentral.net/en/mn26
For a generation delighting in attachment, excited by attachment, enjoying attachment, this/that conditionality & dependent co-arising are hard to see.

Thanissaro https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html

Dinsdale
Posts: 5696
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
Location: Andromeda looks nice

Re: Pali Term: Idappaccayatā

Post by Dinsdale » Mon Jun 04, 2018 8:17 am

Sylvester wrote:
Sun Jul 07, 2013 2:39 am
It's true that some translators (eg Ven Nanananda cited) translate the idaṃ in "imasmiṃ sati idaṃ hoti" to read as "this", leading to a very peculiar sentence "When there is this this is".

It's totally unnecessary to be so scrupulous, according to Warder. Many of these Pali pronouns are "deictic", such that although the primary meaning of idaṃ is "this", it can also mean "that", if "that" is part of the discussion. Since idappaccayatā is a summary of the nidānas, and each nidāna is a link between a paccaya and its consequent/effect, the idaṃ (as the consequent) should be given its deictic sense as "that", so that the imasmiṃ (loc of "this") is reserved for the paccaya. The better translation would be the more common one that acknowledges the deictic nature of idaṃ .
:goodpost:

IMO "When this is, this is.." is just a poor translation and a :redherring:.

It muddies the water and fails to convey the intended meaning, which clearly relates to the conditionality between one nidana and another, this nidana and that nidana.
Buddha save me from new-agers!

User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 16165
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Pali Term: Idappaccayatā

Post by mikenz66 » Mon Jun 04, 2018 9:41 am

I don't really get it either, even after reading his explanation:

Questions & Answers On Dhamma
Bhikkhu K. Ñāṇananda
http://seeingthroughthenet.net/books/
The ‘parroting’ method of paṭiccasamuppāda involves
dishing out the 12 terms, and even then, the paṭiloma is often
forgotten. But the important thing is the principle, embedded
in ‘asmiṃ sati...’, as seen in many Suttas. There again, 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
something outside the pair, which is misleading. Paṭicca-
samuppāda 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.
Perhaps it's a peculiarity of Sri Lankan English, but I can't see any real difference between this-this, and this-that. Perhaps he's saying that using "that" implies a certain "distancing" of what arises due to "this", from the "this"...

:heart:
Mike

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests