Sampajannyya

Explore the ancient language of the Tipitaka and Theravāda commentaries
Post Reply
User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6646
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Sampajannyya

Post by Cittasanto »

Hi All,
this may be a sanskrit word but I am not sure as I can find no direct dictionary reference to it (shame I only have an english one hehe) in any sanskrit or pali dictionary although only the pali dictionary on PTS site has given any close matches (Sampajanna)

is Sampajannyya another form of Sampajanna or are these two completely seperate words? and does anyone know the meaning of the former?
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.

He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill
User avatar
Macavity
Posts: 110
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 11:36 am
Location: Thailand

Re: Sampajannyya

Post by Macavity »

Pali: sampajañña.
Buddhist Sanskrit: saṃprajanya

As used in the Sanskrit Āgamas the word saṃprajanya bears the same meaning as sampajañña in the Pali Nikāyas. It won't necessarily bear the same meaning in the Sanskritic Abhidharma systems and Mahayana sources.
User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6646
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: Sampajannyya

Post by Cittasanto »

Macavity wrote:Pali: sampajañña.
Buddhist Sanskrit: saṃprajanya

As used in the Sanskrit Āgamas the word saṃprajanya bears the same meaning as sampajañña in the Pali Nikāyas. It won't necessarily bear the same meaning in the Sanskritic Abhidharma systems and Mahayana sources.
yeah but what is Sampajannyya
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.

He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill
Sanghamitta
Posts: 1614
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 9:21 am
Location: By the River Thames near London.

Re: Sampajannyya

Post by Sanghamitta »

I wonder if it is a mistransliteration for sampajanna ( clarity, alertness ) Manapa. These things do occur.

:anjali:
The going for refuge is the door of entrance to the teachings of the Buddha.

Bhikku Bodhi.
User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6646
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: Sampajannyya

Post by Cittasanto »

hi
yes it does, but it was from a translation of the sankrit version of the satipatthana sutta the word was used, although other pali spellings were used in the translation which would be more familiar to people
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.

He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill
User avatar
kc2dpt
Posts: 957
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 3:48 pm

Re: Sampajannyya

Post by kc2dpt »

ñ is pronounce nyuh as in the Spanish mañana (manyana)
- Peter

Be heedful and you will accomplish your goal.
User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6646
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: Sampajannyya

Post by Cittasanto »

Peter wrote:ñ is pronounce nyuh as in the Spanish mañana (manyana)
I am thinking this is just another spelling of sampajanna now, just spelt phenetically without the ñ
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.

He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill
Sanghamitta
Posts: 1614
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 9:21 am
Location: By the River Thames near London.

Re: Sampajannyya

Post by Sanghamitta »

That would be my guess too.
The going for refuge is the door of entrance to the teachings of the Buddha.

Bhikku Bodhi.
User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6646
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: Sampajannyya

Post by Cittasanto »

I would post the text but it isn't in a supported format!

if anyone wan't to see it send me your mail via a PM.
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.

He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill
User avatar
Macavity
Posts: 110
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 11:36 am
Location: Thailand

Re: Sampajannyya

Post by Macavity »

Manapa wrote:yeah but what is Sampajannyya
No such word. In both Pali and Sanskrit the consonant cluster -nnyy- is phonetically impossible.
User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6646
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: Sampajannyya

Post by Cittasanto »

I have realised it was from the chinese translation not the sanskrit as I earlier thought, maybe it is the pronounciation found from the chinese version?
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.

He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill
User avatar
Macavity
Posts: 110
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 11:36 am
Location: Thailand

Re: Sampajannyya

Post by Macavity »

Manapa wrote:I have realised it was from the chinese translation not the sanskrit as I earlier thought, maybe it is the pronounciation found from the chinese version?
The spelling is probably just from someone being careless.

It's true that some Sanskrit and prakritic words were transliterated into Chinese, rather than translated, but sampajañña isn't one of them. In the Āgamas it's translated chêng-chih.
User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6646
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: Sampajannyya

Post by Cittasanto »

Hi Macavity,
always good to know, cheers!
I didn't meant the word was translated but the pronounciation of the word hence the extra letters, if you get my drift?
something allong the lines of mum and mom
Macavity wrote:
Manapa wrote:I have realised it was from the chinese translation not the sanskrit as I earlier thought, maybe it is the pronounciation found from the chinese version?
The spelling is probably just from someone being careless.

It's true that some Sanskrit and prakritic words were transliterated into Chinese, rather than translated, but sampajañña isn't one of them. In the Āgamas it's translated chêng-chih.
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.

He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill
Post Reply