mikenz66 wrote:Ajahn Pasanno's alternate translation: ‘Any experience of arising is an experience of ceasing’ to me sounds a lot like the commentarial descriptions of the experience of rapid arising and dissolution of phenomena.
Sorry to rake up such an ancient post, but I think this transcendental vision is actually amenable to a very standard grammatical analysis.
yaṃ kiñci samudayadhammaṃ sabbaṃ taṃ nirodhadhammaṃ
I've left out the iti
quotation mark, as it adds nothing to the analysis.
First, the structure of the sentence. It is one of those very standard sentences comprising of 2 clauses defined by ya
.... The ya
is a relative pronoun, while the ta
is the demonstrative pronoun. Here, the pronouns have been inflected into yaṃ ... taṃ
. So, it's vitally important to ensure that any literal translation acknowledges this structure by somehow preserving in English the "whatever... that..." pronouns.
Since we have sabbaṃ taṃ,
it should be "whatever... all that [is]", where the "ïs"is supplied by the silent copula hoti
which is typically not used in suttas. As for yaṃ kiñci
, the kiñci
just means "something". As such, yaṃ kiñci X, sabbaṃ taṃ Y
would literally mean "whatever something [is] X, all that [is] Y". An idiomatic translation would be "änything whatsoever that is X, all that is Y". The ta
/that is referring to the subject of the sentence kiñci
, as Piotr pointed out.
I think when you finally break down the sentence into its basic structure, it will become patent that the words samudayadhammaṃ
are functioning as adjectives or adjectival nouns to predicate the "things" indicated by the pronouns ya
. Therefore, the insight can best be translated literally as "Anything whatsoever that is of the nature to arise, all of that is of the nature to cease." All the 4 translations on ATI carry this connotation in one way or another.
I therefore think that Ajahn Pasanno's translation does not really work, since he's made dhamma
/experience the subject of the sentence, whereas the subject is something else indicated by the kiñci
that has the dhamma
/nature as a predicate.
I'm not sure if the Comy explains this in terms of the "momentariness"model, but I found one Comy explanation for the insight -
Dhammacakkhunti sotāpattimaggo adhippeto. Tassa uppattiākāradassanatthaṃ ‘‘yaṃkiñci samudayadhammaṃ, sabbaṃ taṃ nirodhadhamma’’nti vuttaṃ. Tañhi nirodhaṃ ārammaṇaṃ katvā kiccavasena eva saṅkhatadhamme paṭivijjhantaṃ uppajjati.
The Pali is too difficult for me, but it sounds as if knowledge about conditioned states arise by way of having made cessation the object.