The proper translation of Avijjāpaccayā saṅkhārā, etc.

Explore the ancient language of the Tipitaka and Theravāda commentaries
User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 5745
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm
Location: Whitby, Canada

Re: The proper translation of Avijjāpaccayā saṅkhārā, etc.

Post by Coëmgenu »

I forgot Old Uyghur and Tocharian in my listing of EBT languages. I'm sure there are other minority ones I forgot.
Not the one and not another,
unending and impermanent --
of the many Buddhas' transformative teachings,
this is that sweet nectar's taste.

For if a Buddha is not born in the world,
or if the Buddhadharma is completely extinct,
all of the wisdom of the Pratyekabuddhas
would separately arise (from it).

(MMK XVIII.11-12 Madhyamakaśāstra T 1564.23c16)
ToVincent
Posts: 1506
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 6:02 pm

Re: The proper translation of Avijjāpaccayā saṅkhārā, etc.

Post by ToVincent »

Coëmgenu wrote: Sat Nov 27, 2021 8:56 pm I forgot Old Uyghur and Tocharian in my listing of EBT languages. I'm sure there are other minority ones I forgot.
And?

This is exactly what I call gish gallop.

Good night.
.
.
In this world, there are people acting and yearning for the Mara's world; some for the Brahma's world; some for the Unborn.
.
Those who desire good are few, and those who desire evil are many.
Buddha
(And you just can't imagine how much goodness, those who desire evil, are ready to display - ToVincent).
User avatar
Ontheway
Posts: 1489
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2021 3:35 pm

Re: The proper translation of Avijjāpaccayā saṅkhārā, etc.

Post by Ontheway »

Pure papanca. :juggling:
"The Buddha is like the rising sun; the Dhamma as already stated is like the web of his rays; and the Sangha is like the world rid by him of darkness."

Paramatthajotikā
(The Illustrator of Ultimate Meaning)
ToVincent
Posts: 1506
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 6:02 pm

Re: The proper translation of Avijjāpaccayā saṅkhārā, etc.

Post by ToVincent »

Ontheway wrote: Sun Nov 28, 2021 2:48 pm Pure papanca. :juggling:
.

I don't know to who the above remark is addressed.
By the way, this is the meaning of papañca - https://justpaste.it/3f6gs — to be discussed if needed, in another thread - please.

Again, in Pali paccaya (and paṭicca,) come from pacceti [patī (paṭi+i)]
https://dictionary.sutta.org/browse/p/pacceti/

Not only the PTS is giving this "feedback" (going, returning to, and realising) meaning — but the Sanskrit also, goes along with that.
I see no reason why this original meaning, becomes so distorted in its declensional and conjugational uses.

::::::::::::::::::::
Pali
::::::::::::::::::::
Pacceti (paṭi+i) :
- to come on to; to come back to; realise. (PTS)

::::::::::::::::::::
Sanskrit
::::::::::::::::::::
Pratī [prati-√ i ]
- to come back, return (RV.)
- known, understood (Pāṇ.)
- Desid. [ pratīṣiṣati ], to wish or try to understand (Pāṇ.)
.
.
In this world, there are people acting and yearning for the Mara's world; some for the Brahma's world; some for the Unborn.
.
Those who desire good are few, and those who desire evil are many.
Buddha
(And you just can't imagine how much goodness, those who desire evil, are ready to display - ToVincent).
ToVincent
Posts: 1506
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 6:02 pm

Re: The proper translation of Avijjāpaccayā saṅkhārā, etc.

Post by ToVincent »

These are some examples (with parallels in SN,) where hetu and paccaya mean respectively "impulse/cause" and "feedback" (return [and realization]).
If you want to discuss other suttas, please have them with parallels for the extracts you will quote. Thanks.

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
EXTRACTS (with parallels) :
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

The Paccaya sutta (Thag 3.2.)
See for instance the impulse (hetu) to go through some kind of ascetism to arrive at the feedback (paccaya) of plucking the craving — or the impulse of energy, to arrive at the feedback of the three knowledge.

----------

It is a blessing for the people of Aṅga and Magadha,
that this person enjoys their
robe and almsfood,
feedback/returns (? condition ?) and lodgings
Lābhā aṅgānaṁ magadhānaṁ,
Yesāyaṁ paribhuñjati;
Cīvaraṁ piṇḍapātañca
Paccayaṁ sayanāsanaṁ
Thag 7.4

----------

They weren’t so very eager
for the requistes from life,
such as medicines and their feedback,
as they were for the ending of defilements.
Jīvitānaṁ parikkhāre,
bhesajje atha paccaye;
Na bāḷhaṁ ussukā āsuṁ,
yathā te āsavakkhaye.
Thag 16.10
Bhesajja — Skt. bhaiṣajya = any remedy, drug or medicine (ŚBr. Suśr.)
Note also that bhaiṣajya has the meaning of "healing efficacy" (VS.) — that is to say the "feedback" - (the capacity to produce in return, a desired effect) - from a medicine.


----------

“By itself (nu kho), in what (ko) cause, sir, in what feedback is the disclosure of the aggregate of form.
“Ko nu kho, bhante, hetu ko paccayo rūpakkhandhassa paññāpanāya;
“By itself (nu kho), in what (ko) cause, sir, in what feedback is the disclosure of the aggregate of feeling … etc.

“The four primary elements are the cause - the four primary elements are the feedback to the disclosure of the aggregate of form.
“Cattāro kho, bhikkhu, mahābhūtā hetu, cattāro mahābhūtā paccayo rūpakkhandhassa paññāpanāya.
SN 22.82
Proper translation
What is the cause and condition, venerable sir, for the manifestation of the form aggregate?
...
The four great elements, bhikkhu, are the cause and condition for the manifestation of the form aggregate
Bodhi
What is the cause, sir, what is the reason why the aggregate of form is found?
...
The four primary elements are the reason why the aggregate of form is found.
Sujato
Paññāpana (nt.) — [fr.paññāpeti] = disclosure.
Paññāpanāya - dative = indirect object beneficiary of the action of the verb.
Notice the PTS definition of "come on to", that connote a meaning of "appearance" — of "disclosure"

Rūpakkhandhassa - genitive.


----------

In what cause (hetu), in what feedback (paccaya), are sentient beings fully extinguished in the present life?
Ko pana, bhante, hetu, ko paccayo yena m’idhekacce sattā diṭṭheva dhamme parinibbāyantī”ti?

“Householder, there are sights known by the eye that are desirable, lovely, agreeable, pleasing, sensually enticing, exciting (hetu/impulse).
If a bhikkhu approves, welcomes, and remains attached to them (paccaya/feedback), his consciousness depends upon that and appropriates it.
Householder, a bhikkhu with his own appropriation, does not become extinguished.
“Santi kho, gahapati, cakkhuviññeyyā rūpā iṭṭhā kantā manāpā piyarūpā kāmūpasaṁhitā rajanīyā.
Tañce bhikkhu abhinandati abhivadati ajjhosāya tiṭṭhati. Tassa taṁ abhinandato abhivadato ajjhosāya tiṭṭhato tannissitaṁ viññāṇaṁ hoti tadupādānaṁ.
Saupādāno, gahapati, bhikkhu no parinibbāyati.

There are sounds … smells … tastes … touches …
santi kho, gahapati, jivhāviññeyyā rasā …pe…

(Note: If they don't approoriate, they will be extinguished).
SN 35.124

----------

Etc.

||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||

The pericope is properly translated as:
kho hetu ko paccayo...
In what impulse/cause (hetu) , in what feedback (return [and realization]) ...

And the impulse/cause (hetu) and the feedback/return (paccaya) that give rise to [xxxxxx] — this impulse/cause, and this feedback, are also impermanent , perishing, and changing.
Yopi hetu yopi paccayo [...] uppādāya, sopi hetu sopi paccayo anicco vipariṇāmī aññathābhāvī.
.
.
In this world, there are people acting and yearning for the Mara's world; some for the Brahma's world; some for the Unborn.
.
Those who desire good are few, and those who desire evil are many.
Buddha
(And you just can't imagine how much goodness, those who desire evil, are ready to display - ToVincent).
auto
Posts: 2892
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2017 12:02 pm

Re: The proper translation of Avijjāpaccayā saṅkhārā, etc.

Post by auto »

When person has mentally painful feeling, then the cittas what arise in that person are rooted(hetu) in hatred.
abhidhamma wrote:Now a mother is worrying about her daughter. What citta
will be arising in the mother?
It is dosa-måla citta with the name:
Domanassa-sahagataü pañigha-sampayuttaü asaïkhàrika citta.
Mentally painful feeling is the concentration. And one has to find out the nutriment(āhāra) what corresponds(sahagata) with the mentally painful feeling. This nutriment is hatred in our case.
*paṭigha ~ āhāra maybe
When found, it fulfills the condition of have had realized said concentration for then to be possible to develop concentration factors. Factors, i gather, are the purified version what constitutes hatred.

Look we are same, we like to speculate.
ToVincent wrote: Tue Nov 30, 2021 5:39 am The pericope is properly translated as:
kho hetu ko paccayo...
In what impulse/cause (hetu) , in what feedback (return [and realization]) ...

And the impulse/cause (hetu) and the feedback/return (paccaya) that give rise to [xxxxxx] — this impulse/cause, and this feedback, are also impermanent , perishing, and changing.
Yopi hetu yopi paccayo [...] uppādāya, sopi hetu sopi paccayo anicco vipariṇāmī aññathābhāvī.
.
*
abhidhamma wrote:Domanassa : mentally painful feeling, displeasure
Pañigha : dosa—hatred, illwill, resentment
ToVincent
Posts: 1506
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 6:02 pm

Re: The proper translation of Avijjāpaccayā saṅkhārā, etc.

Post by ToVincent »

auto wrote: Tue Nov 30, 2021 5:16 pm .....
I agree.
But this is not "speculation" — It is just the right way to translate it.
There is an impulse/cause/hetu = worry.
And there is a feedback/return/paccaya = dosa-mala citta.

Although it does not really adress the hetu/paccaya correlation per se (afaik), Abhidhamma is just explaining here, this quite simple underlying concept, in very complicated terms.
This is why I am not so much attached to Abhidhamma.
In other words "domanassa-sahagataü pañigha-sampayuttaü asaïkhàrika citta", might be a bit overdone; and hides a bit also, the simpleness of what really imports.

What imports is that the dosa-mala citta, should make the woman realize the underlying worry (hetu).
It's a two way correlation.

The same way that - as seen above - “the four primary elements are the cause - the four primary elements are the feedback, to the disclosure of the aggregate of form".
Which means that the four primary (external) elements in the nāmarūpa nidāna (https://justpaste.it/1n1ii) , are the hetu - that their disclosure in the saḷāyatana nidāna is not only the feedback, (from/by means of the internal four primary elements, ) to the nāmarūpa nidāna - but that one who sees that disclosure in the saḷāyatana nidāna (through the internal four primary elements) , should also be able to understand how these four external primary elements have come to be ( from the nāmarūpa nidāna).

In simple philosophical terms, one could say that the actual feeds its disclosure back to the potential. And both should realize something about the process.

The hetu/paccaya is always the correlation between two events — and the paccaya is what should bring the hetu to realization.
.
.
In this world, there are people acting and yearning for the Mara's world; some for the Brahma's world; some for the Unborn.
.
Those who desire good are few, and those who desire evil are many.
Buddha
(And you just can't imagine how much goodness, those who desire evil, are ready to display - ToVincent).
User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 5745
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm
Location: Whitby, Canada

Re: The proper translation of Avijjāpaccayā saṅkhārā, etc.

Post by Coëmgenu »

As someone living in an English-speaking country who has been speaking English since infancy, I can tell readers who do not speak English as a first language what feedback is. Independent of my own explanation, we can also find this same sense substantiated in many good sources.

When you speak into a microphone, if the room and the amplification materials in the room, the sound system etc., are not properly acoustically prepared, you will hear a sudden sharp screech from the speakers. It will either be a low buzzing that builds, or a sudden piercing high tone.



In this example, ambient sound from the room as well as unheard (by people) sound originated in the sound system itself are picked up by the microphone. These sounds are then produced by the speaker. The microphone then picks up more of that sound from the speaker, and the speaker in turn produces more of the sound. Does that make sense?

The abstract sense that the OP wishes to use "feedback" in appears to be based on a metaphorical and philosophical extension of this principle. Indeed, from scanning dictionary entries, since the dictionaries are strong with this thread, we can determine that all of the senses that are in parallel to the vague and loosely-defined sense of "feedback" argued for by the OP are actually derived from this process related to sound engineering. From five picked from amongst the most popular and well-established English-language dictionaries, dictionaries that can be trusted to give you the proper English-language senses for an English word, I have collected the definitions of "feedback" present.

Oxford Reference (Science and Technology):
The process by which knowledge acquired from past experiences informs and alters actors' choices when they encounter similar situations. It is a central concept of cybernetics and information theory.
Cambridge:
1. information or statements of opinion about something, such as a new product, that can tell you if it is successful or liked
2. the sudden, high, unpleasant noise sometimes produced by an amplifier when sound it produces is put back into it
3. the return back into a machine or system of part of what it produces, especially to improve what is produced
4. reaction to a process or activity, or the information obtained from such a reaction
Collins:
1. If you get feedback on your work or progress, someone tells you how well or badly you are doing, and how you could improve. If you get good feedback you have worked or performed well.
2. Feedback is the unpleasant high-pitched sound produced by a piece of electrical equipment when part of the signal that comes out goes back into it.
MacMillan:
1. comments about how well or how badly someone is doing something, which are intended to help them do it better
2. the high loud noise that electrical equipment makes when part of the sound that it sends out goes back into it
Merriam-Webster:
1. a: the transmission of evaluative or corrective information about an action, event, or process to the original or controlling source, also: the information so transmitted
1. b: the partial reversion (see REVERSION sense 3a) of the effects of a process to its source or to a preceding stage
2. the return to the input of a part of the output of a machine, system, or process (as for producing changes in an electronic circuit that improve performance or in an automatic control device that provide self-corrective action)
3. a rumbling, whining, or whistling sound resulting from an amplified or broadcast signal (such as music or speech) that has been returned as input and retransmitted
Feedback occurs with one element. Sound is fed into a sound system and a "feedback loop" is created when it indefinitely re-amplifies the same sound. To say that "Viññāṇa is the feedback of (the) saṅkhāra," is to say that there is an Element A (feedback) and a System A (what produces the feedback). System A must be a system external to viññāṇa that broadcasts or processes it as Element A. What is produced by System A must be exclusively more instances of Element A, otherwise it is simply not "feedback."

The edifice may appear to stand when one nidāna is examined independently of the others, however, when looking at the entirety of DO, the sentiment "is the feedback of" for each nidāna quickly becomes a meaningless incoherent nothing. We get a situation where:

Element A is the feedback of System A. The saṅkhāras are the feedback of ignorance.
Element A is the feedback of Element A and System A. Viññāṇa is the feedback of the saṅkhāras.
Element A is the feedback of Element A(x2) and System A. Nāmarūpa is the feedback of viññāṇa.

Because we are framing things on terms of "feedback," nāmarūpa can be nothing other than a new name for the same feedback what was Element A that constituted the product of System A. Similarly, the six sense bases are the same. Why is this? Because the feedback is not identical to the system that produces it, and feedback is not itself a self-perpetuating system. In the DO formula, each limb must be able to function both as a "system" and its "feedback." Element A must be able to become System B to produce Feedback Element B. Otherwise, there is no Element B and there is no diversity or distinction between the discrete elements of DO. In the "feedback model" as presented by the OP, there is no mechanism by which a Feedback Element can become its own System for generating a feedback that is distinct from itself. It is simply "feedback" and can do nothing put perpetuate itself through the system. "Feedback" on its own without a system to "feed back into" simply does not exist.

If the saṅkhāras are merely the feedback of ignorance, then they categorically cannot be the System that then produces the "non-saṅkhāra" feedback that is viññāṇa. If the saṅkhāras are feedback, they cannot function as the basis for which another feedback distinct from the saṅkhāras emerges. This is incontrovertible, if the proper English sense for "feedback" is understood. Instead, the OP appears to use an idiosyncratic and personalized usage of "feedback" that is not substantiated in any major English dictionary and also is unknown to me. He says, "In simple philosophical terms, one could say that the actual feeds its disclosure back to the potential. And both should realize something about the process," but this is abstract and vague and not systematic thought. What does it mean for the Feedback to "realize something" about the process of its interaction with the System? The Feedback is simply a perpetuation of one element through a system. It cannot become its own system that can then create a different "feedback." That isn't what feedback is.
Last edited by Coëmgenu on Wed Dec 01, 2021 4:08 pm, edited 6 times in total.
Not the one and not another,
unending and impermanent --
of the many Buddhas' transformative teachings,
this is that sweet nectar's taste.

For if a Buddha is not born in the world,
or if the Buddhadharma is completely extinct,
all of the wisdom of the Pratyekabuddhas
would separately arise (from it).

(MMK XVIII.11-12 Madhyamakaśāstra T 1564.23c16)
auto
Posts: 2892
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2017 12:02 pm

Re: The proper translation of Avijjāpaccayā saṅkhārā, etc.

Post by auto »

I don't know how to find Sutta, so i copy from abhidhamma. It kind of shows how Buddha defines terms,
abhidhamma wrote:According to Aïguttara Nikàya (vi, 13), Buddha remarked:
“Volition is action (kamma), thus I say, O monks; for as soon as
volition arises, one does the action, be it by body, speech or mind.”
so if to then say..
ToVincent wrote: Thu Nov 25, 2021 7:57 amIgnorance is a condition for choices” (Sujato - late translation)
Avijjāpaccayā saṅkhārā

With ignorance as condition, volitional formations (Bodhi)
Avijjāpaccayā saṅkhārā
gives - paṭicca
https://suttacentral.net/sn14.12/en/sujato?layout=sidebyside&reference=none&notes=asterisk&highlight=false&script=latin wrote: The element of sensuality gives rise to sensual perceptions.
Kāmadhātuṁ, bhikkhave, paṭicca uppajjati kāmasaññā
dependent - paṭicca
https://suttacentral.net/sn12.44/en/sujato?layout=sidebyside&reference=none&notes=asterisk&highlight=false&script=latin wrote:Eye consciousness arises dependent on the eye and sights. The meeting of the three is contact.
Cakkhuñca paṭicca rūpe ca uppajjati cakkhuviññāṇaṁ. Tiṇṇaṁ saṅgati phasso.
no paṭicca here
https://suttacentral.net/sn55.40/en/sujato?layout=sidebyside&reference=none&notes=asterisk&highlight=false&script=latin wrote: When they live diligently, joy springs up.
Tassa evaṁ appamattassa viharato pāmojjaṁ jāyati.
..would it be ok to assume paṭicca = is? if to take into account how Buddha defines terms? ignorance is volition; as soon as one is hindered by ignorance there is volition.

sankhara is two terms sam and ahara i believe,
ToVincent wrote: Wed Dec 01, 2021 5:32 amThere is an impulse/cause/hetu = worry.
And there is a feedback/return/paccaya = dosa-mala citta.
So the worry 'is'(paticca) dosa mula citta.
Maybe, maybe it does address
ToVincent wrote: Wed Dec 01, 2021 5:32 amAlthough it does not really adress the hetu/paccaya correlation per se (afaik), Abhidhamma is just explaining here, this quite simple underlying concept, in very complicated terms.
ToVincent
Posts: 1506
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 6:02 pm

Re: The proper translation of Avijjāpaccayā saṅkhārā, etc.

Post by ToVincent »

auto wrote: Wed Dec 01, 2021 4:01 pm ....
Please auto, be kind. Do serve us suttas with parallels, for the extracts you are quoting — (and the Pali for the Abhidhamma). I don't have time to do the job for you - I'm sorry.
Once done, I might be able to answer you better.
.
.
In this world, there are people acting and yearning for the Mara's world; some for the Brahma's world; some for the Unborn.
.
Those who desire good are few, and those who desire evil are many.
Buddha
(And you just can't imagine how much goodness, those who desire evil, are ready to display - ToVincent).
ToVincent
Posts: 1506
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 6:02 pm

Re: The proper translation of Avijjāpaccayā saṅkhārā, etc.

Post by ToVincent »

Note that the OP said earlier that paccaya, that comes from pacceti, means:

::::::::::::::::::::
Pali
::::::::::::::::::::
Pacceti (paṭi+i) :
- to come on to; to come back to; realise. (PTS)

::::::::::::::::::::
Sanskrit
::::::::::::::::::::
Pratī [prati-√ i ]
- to come back, return (RV.)
- known, understood (Pāṇ.)
- Desid. [ pratīṣiṣati ], to wish or try to understand (Pāṇ.)

Anyone will understand that formulating a single word, from all the underlying meanings above, is a quite difficult endeavour.
And anyone with good faith, will also understand that the following definition of "feedback", somewhat encompasses the all shebang:

Merriam Webster:
------------------------------
Feedback:
— the transmission of evaluative information about an action, event, or process to the original or controlling source.

Maybe the "come on" (to) side of the process, is not really included in this definition. But it is pretty much implied in the hetu/paccaya process.
I suppose that at the time of the PTS, "come on to" meant "come on" (to) [as in appear or become visible "to" someone]. I am not going to give you the entry of the Merriam-Webster dictionary, nor the Oxford Reference (Sex & Closet).

Don't we all know that the feedback of a medicine, is its healing efficacy? — (see Thag 16.10 above cited).
One does not have to mince hair to grasp that — does he?
.
.
In this world, there are people acting and yearning for the Mara's world; some for the Brahma's world; some for the Unborn.
.
Those who desire good are few, and those who desire evil are many.
Buddha
(And you just can't imagine how much goodness, those who desire evil, are ready to display - ToVincent).
User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 5745
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm
Location: Whitby, Canada

Re: The proper translation of Avijjāpaccayā saṅkhārā, etc.

Post by Coëmgenu »

The OP states that anyone of good faith will note that this definition...

the transmission of evaluative information about an action, event, or process to the original or controlling source

... "somewhat encompasses the all shebang."

If that is so, then we can use it in place of paccaya in a translation and it will remain semantically intact, if no longer a direct translation. We can do this with any good definition.

Let's take the sentence, "We're getting some feedback from the microphone."

Because it is a good definition, we can say that "We're getting the transmission of evaluative information about an action, event, or process to the original or controlling source, which is the microphone."

This cannot be done with the DO formula, because this definition there does not apply, because "feedback" there does not apply.

e.g.
The saṅkhāras are the transmission of evaluative information about an action, event, or process to the original or controlling source, (which in this case is) ignorance.
There is little other way to make this work. The definition appears to be faulty and not to apply to DO.
Not the one and not another,
unending and impermanent --
of the many Buddhas' transformative teachings,
this is that sweet nectar's taste.

For if a Buddha is not born in the world,
or if the Buddhadharma is completely extinct,
all of the wisdom of the Pratyekabuddhas
would separately arise (from it).

(MMK XVIII.11-12 Madhyamakaśāstra T 1564.23c16)
User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 5745
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm
Location: Whitby, Canada

Re: The proper translation of Avijjāpaccayā saṅkhārā, etc.

Post by Coëmgenu »

Coëmgenu wrote: Wed Dec 01, 2021 8:49 pmLet's take the sentence, "We're getting some feedback from the microphone."

Because it is a good definition, we can say that "We're getting the transmission of evaluative information about an action, event, or process to the original or controlling source, which is the microphone."
We can't, actually. I take this back. The definition is no good. Feedback is such a terrible translation, it must have melted by brain for a moment.

The definition the OP chose from Merriam-Webster has "evaluative" in it. The information in that definition is not the same as the "information" that gets fed back through the audio system. This is mind-melting, apologies all.

There was a blunder and I heedlessly followed the blunder right into blunderland. It's a pretty bad mistake on my part. In my meagre defense, I was choosing to read the passage as if ToVincent had chosen a correct definition metaphorically drawn out of the process of audio feedback.

When you said this...
ToVincent wrote: Wed Dec 01, 2021 7:09 pmAnyone will understand that formulating a single word, from all the underlying meanings above, is a quite difficult endeavour.
And anyone with good faith, will also understand that the following definition of "feedback", somewhat encompasses the all shebang:

Merriam Webster:
------------------------------
Feedback:
— the transmission of evaluative information about an action, event, or process to the original or controlling source.
...this is the sort of feedback that comes as a response to, "Can I get some feedback on my essay?" "Can I get some feedback on my job performance?" The key clarificatory word is that the information in it is "evaluative." It is to do with evaluation of the quality of something. This isn't the sort of feedback that "feeds back" into a system.

So we don't yet actually have a cogent way in which "feedback" is being used by the OP yet. My explanation of how paccaya is not "feedback" was premature.
Not the one and not another,
unending and impermanent --
of the many Buddhas' transformative teachings,
this is that sweet nectar's taste.

For if a Buddha is not born in the world,
or if the Buddhadharma is completely extinct,
all of the wisdom of the Pratyekabuddhas
would separately arise (from it).

(MMK XVIII.11-12 Madhyamakaśāstra T 1564.23c16)
ToVincent
Posts: 1506
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 6:02 pm

Re: The proper translation of Avijjāpaccayā saṅkhārā, etc.

Post by ToVincent »

I repeat:

Paccaya and paṭicca come from pacceti [patī (paṭi+i)]
https://dictionary.sutta.org/browse/p/pacceti/
They are the declensional and conjugational uses of pacceti.

There is no "cause", or "origin" in the definition of pacceti.
Not even in the definition of the Sanskrit "pratī".

::::::::::::::::::::
Pali
::::::::::::::::::::
Pacceti (paṭi+i) :
- to come on to; to come back to; realise. (PTS)
Again, one may suppose that "to come on to" might have meant "to come on* (to) at the time of the writing of this PTS' definition — namely, " appear, become visible — encompassing the all process, viz. : start running, move towards, then become visible (see note below).

::::::::::::::::::::
Sanskrit
::::::::::::::::::::
Pratī [prati-√ i ]
- to come back, return (RV.)
- known, understood (Pāṇ.)
- Desid. [ pratīṣiṣati ], to wish or try to understand (Pāṇ.)

--------

There is a discussion on this forum about the impossibility of paccaya, or hetu to mean "cause". The rationale being, that death can't be the cause of birth. It can only be a "condition".
Pages have been written on that useless debate.
I was just wondering how they would translate the pericope "ko hetu, ko paccaya", usually translated as: "What is the cause and condition" (reason) ?

AND AGAIN,

How do they translate:

Saṅkhārapaccayā viññāṇaṃ
Viññāṇapaccayā nāmarūpaṃ
...

upādānapaccayā bhavo,
bhavapaccayā jāti
jātipaccayā jarāmaraṇaṃ

With a straight, plain grammar, unmixed with "dynamic and formal equivalence"?!?!

AND ALSO

How do they translate "paṭiccasamuppāda" and "paṭiccasamuppanā"?


________

* Note:
I usually rely on the Wordnet database https://wordnet.princeton.edu, for definitions
Online version: http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

Come on : http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/we ... o3=&o4=&h=

.
.
In this world, there are people acting and yearning for the Mara's world; some for the Brahma's world; some for the Unborn.
.
Those who desire good are few, and those who desire evil are many.
Buddha
(And you just can't imagine how much goodness, those who desire evil, are ready to display - ToVincent).
User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 5745
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm
Location: Whitby, Canada

Re: The proper translation of Avijjāpaccayā saṅkhārā, etc.

Post by Coëmgenu »

So do you still argue for "feedback," or is that done now?

You've complained about things being mixed with "dynamic and formal equivalence." Do you not know what these terms mean still? You must choose one or the other. You cannot have both eschewed, and oftentimes there simply is no formal equivalence possible. English and Pāli are vastly different languages. It's not as bad as English and Chinese, but they are still different.

As for pratītya, you are not finding the correct definition in those dictionaries and sources because they are not dealing with Buddhist Sanskrit and Buddhist Prākrit. Hindus have been telling the Buddhists that they have terrible Sanskrit since the Buddhists have had Sanskritized scriptures. This is because the "Sanskrit" in these scriptures is BHS, not Vedic, not even necessarily "Classical Sanskrit." It is only when we get to later Buddhist texts that Buddhist scriptures (and more often the treatises than the scriptures) are written in "Classical Sanskrit." Even this so-called "Classical" Sanskrit is heavily influenced by the earlier BHS in the word senses used. Buddhists do not use "saṁskāra" the same as Hindus, let alone "pratītya."
Not the one and not another,
unending and impermanent --
of the many Buddhas' transformative teachings,
this is that sweet nectar's taste.

For if a Buddha is not born in the world,
or if the Buddhadharma is completely extinct,
all of the wisdom of the Pratyekabuddhas
would separately arise (from it).

(MMK XVIII.11-12 Madhyamakaśāstra T 1564.23c16)
Post Reply