Yatvādhikaraṇamenaṃ (yatvādhikaraṇametaṃ)

Explore the ancient language of the Tipitaka and Theravāda commentaries
Post Reply
User avatar
Assaji
Posts: 2043
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 7:24 pm

Yatvādhikaraṇamenaṃ (yatvādhikaraṇametaṃ)

Post by Assaji »

Dear Pāli friends,

I would like to make sense of the passage on guarding sense doors:
Idha bhikkhave, bhikkhu cakkhunā rūpaṃ disvā na nimitataggāhī hoti nānubyañjanaggāhī, yatvādhikaraṇamenaṃ cakkhundriyaṃ asaṃvutaṃ viharantaṃ abhijjhā domanassā pāpakā akusalā dhammā anvāssaveyyuṃ, tassa saṃvarāya paṭipajjati, rakkhati cakkhundriyaṃ, cakkhundriye saṃvaraṃ āpajjati.
Would you please explain whether yatvādhikaraṇamenaṃ (in some editions, yatvādhikaraṇametaṃ) applies to the following text, as in translation:
"And how, friend, does one guard the sense-doors? In this a monk seeing an object with the eye, does not seize hold of either its general appearance or its details. Because anyone dwelling with the eye-faculty uncontrolled could be overwhelmed by cupidity and dejection, evil and unwholesome states of mind, therefore he practices to control the eye-faculty, guards it and gains control over it. So one guards the sense-doors.
or to the preceding text, as in translation:
"And how does a monk guard the doors to his sense faculties? There is the case where a monk, on seeing a form with the eye, does not grasp at any theme or variations by which — if he were to dwell without restraint over the faculty of the eye — evil, unskillful qualities such as greed or distress might assail him. He practices with restraint. He guards the faculty of the eye. He achieves restraint with regard to the faculty of the eye.
In the Kaccayana's grammar it is written:
Caggahaṇena aññatthāpi pañcamīvibhatti hoti. Yatohaṃ bhagini ariyāya jātiyā jāto (M. ii, 306). Yato sarāmi attānaṃ (Khu. vi, 175), yato pattosmi viññutaṃ (Khu. vi, 175), yatvādhikaraṇamenaṃ cakkhundriyaṃ asaṃvutaṃ viharantaṃ abhijjhādomanassā pāpakā akusalā dhammā anvāsaveyyuṃ (D. i, 66; S. ii, 384).

By taking "ca", there is also the fifth inflection in other meanings. Sister, from the time I was born by a Noble birth. From the time I remember myself; from time I became knowledgeable; for that reason, evil unwholesome dhammas, covetousness and grief, torment (the bhikkhu) who dwells unrestrained in the eye faculty.

https://ariyajoti.files.wordpress.com/2 ... f#page=151
In the Niruttidīpanī there's a passage:
Imaṃ bhikkhuṃ vinayaṃ ajjhāpehi, atho enaṃ bhikkhuṃ dhammaṃ ajjhāpehi, ime bhikkhū vinayaṃ ajjhāpehi, atho ene bhikkhū dhammaṃ ajjhāpehi, etaṃ bhikkhuṃ vinayaṃ ajjhāpehiiccādinā vattabbaṃ. Tamenaṃ bhikkhave nirayapālā, yatvādhikaraṇamenaṃ bhikkhuṃ iccādīsupi anukathanameva.
which seems to indicate that yatvādhikaraṇamenaṃ applies to the preceding text?

Also, 'yato' is a clause with a shade of question, akin to 'which'. The same clause with a shade of answer, akin to 'because', would be 'tato'?

Metta, Dmytro
User avatar
Assaji
Posts: 2043
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 7:24 pm

Re: Yatvādhikaraṇamenaṃ (yatvādhikaraṇametaṃ)

Post by Assaji »

Since this is an important point, and since I've already started this topic here, let me repost here my further conversation with Ven. Bhikkhu Bodhi.

Venerable kindly wrote me:

Dear Dmytro,

The Visuddhimagga gives a careful and accurate explanation of this passage, with explanation of the grammatical forms. However, it does not resolve the unusual formation yatvādhikaraṇam, which I don't recall seeing elsewhere than in this formula. But I would take yatvādhikaraṇam jointly as stating a reason, which it seems Vism is glossing with the word hetu. In the suttas we also find another compound, similar in structure, used to introduce a reason, yatonidānaṃ, and its correlate, tatonidānaṃ .

You can find the passage in the VRI electronic edition of Vism at I 21, and the English translation by Ven. Nanamoli at Path of Purification I,56. Here is the Pali:

Yatvādhikaraṇamenantiādimhi yaṃkāraṇā yassa cakkhundriyāsaṃvarassa hetu etaṃ puggalaṃ satikavāṭena cakkhundriyaṃ asaṃvutaṃ apihitacakkhudvāraṃ hutvā viharantaṃ ete abhijjhādayo dhammā anvāssaveyyuṃ anubandheyyuṃ. Tassa saṃvarāya paṭipajjatīti tassa cakkhundriyassa satikavāṭena pidahanatthāya paṭipajjati. Evaṃ paṭipajjantoyeva ca rakkhati cakkhundriyaṃ, cakkhundriye saṃvaraṃ āpajjatītipi vuccati.


The point is that, because (yatvādhikaraṇam), if the monk were to leave the eye faculty unrestrained, such unwholesome states as craving and dejection would invade his mind, he practices for the purpose of exercising restraint over it. In the phrase tassa saṃvarāya paṭipajjati, tassa refers back to cakkhundriyassa, as the gloss in Vism makes clear.

I hope this is helpful.

With best wishes,

Bhikkhu Bodhi
User avatar
Assaji
Posts: 2043
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 7:24 pm

Re: Yatvādhikaraṇamenaṃ (yatvādhikaraṇametaṃ)

Post by Assaji »

I replied:

Dear Bhante,

Thank you very much, your reply is illuminative.

The Visuddhimagga gives a careful and accurate explanation of this passage, with explanation of the grammatical forms. However, it does not resolve the unusual formation yatvādhikaraṇam, which I don't recall seeing elsewhere than in this formula. But I would take yatvādhikaraṇam jointly as stating a reason, which it seems Vism is glossing with the word hetu.

I also take that it is about reason, however the fact that this compound consists of two words, yato and adhikaraṇaṃ, deserves careful attention. It implies that the meaning of this compound isn't just one word. "Because" could have been rendered by something much simpler.

As explained in Critical Pali Dictionary, adhikaraṇameans:
acc. ~aṁ, ifc. (adv.) — on account of, in consequence of; for the sake of, concerning (= °hetu); MN III 158,5 foll. (vicikicchâ°, etc.); dhammâ°, MN II 146,15;
As explained in PED, yato means:
from which, out of what cause, ... yatvādhikaraṇam (yato+adhikaraṇam) because (lit. by reason of which) ...
You wrote:
In the suttas we also find another compound, similar in structure, used to introduce a reason, yatonidānaṃ, and its correlate, tatonidānaṃ .
Thank you very much, there's a definitive passage in Vappa sutta containing these words:

“idhassa, vappa, kāyena saṃvuto vācāya saṃvuto manasā saṃvuto avijjāvirāgā vijjuppādā. passasi no tvaṃ, vappa, taṃ ṭhānaṃ yatonidānaṃ purisaṃ dukkhavedaniyā āsavā assaveyyuṃ abhisamparāyan”ti?

“passāmahaṃ, bhante, taṃ ṭhānaṃ. idhassa, bhante, pubbe pāpakammaṃ kataṃ avipakkavipākaṃ. tatonidānaṃ purisaṃ dukkhavedaniyā āsavā assaveyyuṃ abhisamparāyan”ti.

which you translated as:
"Here, Vappa, if one is restrained by body, speech, and mind, then, with the fading away of ignorance and the arising of true knowledge, do you see anything on account of which taints productive of painful feeling might flow in upon such a person in future lives?"

"I do see such a possibility, Bhante. In the past one did an evil deed whose result has not yet ripened. On that account taints productive of painful feeling might flow in upon a person in some future life."
You wrote:
You can find the passage in the VRI electronic edition of Vism at I 21, and the English translation by Ven. Nanamoli at Path of Purification I,56. Here is the Pali:

Yatvādhikaraṇamenantiādimhi yaṃkāraṇā yassa cakkhundriyāsaṃvarassa hetu etaṃ puggalaṃ satikavāṭena cakkhundriyaṃ asaṃvutaṃ apihitacakkhudvāraṃ hutvā viharantaṃ ete abhijjhādayo dhammā anvāssaveyyuṃ anubandheyyuṃ. Tassa saṃvarāya paṭipajjatīti tassa cakkhundriyassa satikavāṭena pidahanatthāya paṭipajjati. Evaṃ paṭipajjantoyeva ca rakkhati cakkhundriyaṃ, cakkhundriye saṃvaraṃ āpajjatītipi vuccati.

The point is that, because (yatvādhikaraṇam), if the monk were to leave the eye faculty unrestrained, such unwholesome states as craving and dejection would invade his mind, he practices for the purpose of exercising restraint over it. In the phrase tassa saṃvarāya paṭipajjati, tassa refers back to cakkhundriyassa, as the gloss in Vism makes clear.
IMHO, the meaning here is more nuanced:

"On account of which, etc." - on account of which (i.e. on account of attending to certain representations (nimitta)), if the monk were to leave the eye faculty unrestrained, such unwholesome states as craving and dejection would invade his mind.

Such understanding fits very well the Āhāra sutta (SN 46.51), which describes how paying attention to certain kinds of representations feeds hindrances, and to other ones - feeds Factors of Comprehension. It would be illogical not to pay attention to any representations (nimitta), regardlless of states this leads to.

Please correct me if necessary.

With best wishes,
Dmytro
User avatar
Assaji
Posts: 2043
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 7:24 pm

Re: Yatvādhikaraṇamenaṃ (yatvādhikaraṇametaṃ)

Post by Assaji »

Venerable wrote:

Dear Dmytro,

You make a good point. In that case, I now take the sense to be:

"Since on that account [on account of seizing upon the nimitta and anubyañjana], craving and dejection--bad unwholesome qualities--would invade him while he dwells unrestrained over the eye-faculty, he practices for its restraint ..."

BB
User avatar
Assaji
Posts: 2043
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 7:24 pm

Re: Yatvādhikaraṇamenaṃ (yatvādhikaraṇametaṃ)

Post by Assaji »

Bhikkhu Bodhi wrote: Fri Oct 27, 2017 9:46 am The Visuddhimagga gives a careful and accurate explanation of this passage, with explanation of the grammatical forms.
I, 42. (b) That described thus: “On seeing a visible object with the eye, he apprehends neither the signs nor the particulars through which, if he left the eye faculty unguarded, evil and unprofitable states of covetousness and grief might invade him; he enters upon the way of its restraint, he guards the eye faculty, undertakes the restraint of the eye faculty. On hearing a sound with the ear ... On smelling an odour with the nose ... On tasting a flavour with the tongue... On touching a tangible object with the body ... On cognizing a mental object with the mind, he apprehends neither the signs nor the particulars through which, if he left the mind faculty unguarded, evil and unprofitable states of covetousness and grief might invade him; he enters upon the way of its restraint, he guards the mind faculty, undertakes the restraint of the mind faculty (M I 180), is virtue of restraint of the sense faculties.
...

53. (b) Now, as regards the virtue of restraint of faculties shown next to that in the way beginning, “on seeing a visible object with the eye,” herein he is a bhikkhu established in the virtue of Pātimokkha restraint. On seeing a visible object with the eye: on seeing a visible object with the eye-consciousness that is capable of seeing visible objects and has borrowed the name “eye” from its instrument. But the Ancients (porāṇā) said: “The eye does not see a visible object because it has no mind. The mind does not see because it has no eyes. But when there is the impingement of door and object he sees by means of the consciousness that has eye-sensitivity as its physical basis. Now, (an idiom) such as this is called an ’accessory locution’ (sasambhārakathā), like ’He shot him with his bow,’ and so on. So the meaning here is this: ’On seeing a visible object with eye-consciousness’”.

54. Apprehends neither the signs: he does not apprehend the sign of woman or man, or any sign that is a basis for defilement such as the sign of beauty, etc.; he stops at what is merely seen. Nor the particulars: he does not apprehend any aspect classed as hand, foot, smile, laughter, talk, looking ahead, looking aside, etc., which has acquired the name “particular” (anubyañjana) because of its particularizing (anu anu byañjanato) defilements, because of its making them manifest themselves. He only apprehends what is really there. Like the Elder Mahā-Tissa who dwelt at Cetiyapabbata.
https://www.bps.lk/olib/bp/bp207h_The-P ... magga).pdf
User avatar
frank k
Posts: 1367
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2011 4:55 pm
Contact:

Re: Yatvādhikaraṇamenaṃ (yatvādhikaraṇametaṃ)

Post by frank k »

Could you bold or point out what part of the vism. quote is explaining yatvadhikaranametam?

And could you summarize the whole thread of what you and Ven. BB decided on the exact meaning of the phrase?
I read the whole thread, and it sounds like you guys are saying:
yatva = 'since', 'if' or 'because' (hetu)
karana = having done [an action referred to in previous sentence or paragraph]
etam = that [previous action]

Assaji wrote: Mon Jun 14, 2021 10:16 am
Bhikkhu Bodhi wrote: Fri Oct 27, 2017 9:46 am The Visuddhimagga gives a careful and accurate explanation of this passage, with explanation of the grammatical forms.
I, 42. (b) That described thus: “On seeing a visible object with the eye, he apprehends neither the signs nor the particulars through which, if he left the eye faculty unguarded, evil and unprofitable states of covetousness and grief might invade him; he enters upon the way of its restraint, he guards the eye faculty, undertakes the restraint of the eye faculty. On hearing a sound with the ear ... On smelling an odour with the nose ... On tasting a flavour with the tongue... On touching a tangible object with the body ... On cognizing a mental object with the mind, he apprehends neither the signs nor the particulars through which, if he left the mind faculty unguarded, evil and unprofitable states of covetousness and grief might invade him; he enters upon the way of its restraint, he guards the mind faculty, undertakes the restraint of the mind faculty (M I 180), is virtue of restraint of the sense faculties.
...

53. (b) Now, as regards the virtue of restraint of faculties shown next to that in the way beginning, “on seeing a visible object with the eye,” herein he is a bhikkhu established in the virtue of Pātimokkha restraint. On seeing a visible object with the eye: on seeing a visible object with the eye-consciousness that is capable of seeing visible objects and has borrowed the name “eye” from its instrument. But the Ancients (porāṇā) said: “The eye does not see a visible object because it has no mind. The mind does not see because it has no eyes. But when there is the impingement of door and object he sees by means of the consciousness that has eye-sensitivity as its physical basis. Now, (an idiom) such as this is called an ’accessory locution’ (sasambhārakathā), like ’He shot him with his bow,’ and so on. So the meaning here is this: ’On seeing a visible object with eye-consciousness’”.

54. Apprehends neither the signs: he does not apprehend the sign of woman or man, or any sign that is a basis for defilement such as the sign of beauty, etc.; he stops at what is merely seen. Nor the particulars: he does not apprehend any aspect classed as hand, foot, smile, laughter, talk, looking ahead, looking aside, etc., which has acquired the name “particular” (anubyañjana) because of its particularizing (anu anu byañjanato) defilements, because of its making them manifest themselves. He only apprehends what is really there. Like the Elder Mahā-Tissa who dwelt at Cetiyapabbata.
https://www.bps.lk/olib/bp/bp207h_The-P ... magga).pdf
www.lucid24.org/sted : ☸Lucid24.org🐘 STED definitions
www.audtip.org/audtip: 🎙️🔊Audio Tales in Pāli: ☸Dharma and Vinaya in many languages
User avatar
Assaji
Posts: 2043
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 7:24 pm

Re: Yatvādhikaraṇamenaṃ (yatvādhikaraṇametaṃ)

Post by Assaji »

frank k wrote: Mon Jun 14, 2021 3:04 pm Could you bold or point out what part of the vism. quote is explaining yatvadhikaranametam?
Unfortunately, as the Venerable wrote,
Bhikkhu Bodhi wrote: Fri Oct 27, 2017 9:46 amThe Visuddhimagga gives a careful and accurate explanation of this passage, with explanation of the grammatical forms. However, it does not resolve the unusual formation yatvādhikaraṇam, which I don't recall seeing elsewhere than in this formula.
frank k wrote: Mon Jun 14, 2021 3:04 pm And could you summarize the whole thread of what you and Ven. BB decided on the exact meaning of the phrase?
Besides the yatvādhikaraṇametaṃ, the intepretation of this passage also hinges on understanding of nimitta and gaṇhāti. It took me a lot of research to understand nimitta as "representation/attunement" and gaṇhāti as "prehends". Accordingly, this passage is about not prehending during the act of perception those representations which lead to unskillful modes of conduct. For example, while perceiving the picture below, you can prehend in your mind either a representation of a couple or a representation of dolphins:

Image

When you don't prehend in your mind a representation of a couple, and focus instead on dolphins, there's no chance for sensual desire to flow in.

The Venerable, interpreting nimitta as "sign" and gaṇhāti as "seizes", arrives to:
Bhikkhu Bodhi wrote: Fri Oct 27, 2017 10:03 am "Since on that account [on account of seizing upon the nimitta and anubyañjana], craving and dejection--bad unwholesome qualities--would invade him while he dwells unrestrained over the eye-faculty, he practices for its restraint ..."
and Ven. Nyanamoli in his Visuddhimagga translation arrived to:
I, 42. (b) That described thus: “On seeing a visible object with the eye, he apprehends neither the signs nor the particulars through which, if he left the eye faculty unguarded, evil and unprofitable states of covetousness and grief might invade him; he enters upon the way of its restraint, he guards the eye faculty, undertakes the restraint of the eye faculty. On hearing a sound with the ear ... On smelling an odour with the nose ... On tasting a flavour with the tongue... On touching a tangible object with the body ... On cognizing a mental object with the mind, he apprehends neither the signs nor the particulars through which, if he left the mind faculty unguarded, evil and unprofitable states of covetousness and grief might invade him.
Interpreting nimitta as "attunement" and gaṇhāti as "prehends", I arrive to:
Kathañca, bhikkhave, bhikkhu indriyesu guttadvāro hoti? Idha, bhikkhave, bhikkhu cakkhunā rūpaṃ disvā na nimittaggāhī hoti nānubyañjanaggāhī, yatvādhikaraṇamenaṃ cakkhundriyaṃ asaṃvutaṃ viharantaṃ abhijjhādomanassā pāpakā akusalā dhammā anvāssaveyyuṃ, tassa saṃvarāya paṭipajjati; rakkhati cakkhundriyaṃ; cakkhundriye saṃvaraṃ āpajjati. Sotena saddaṃ sutvā … ghānena gandhaṃ ghāyitvā … jivhāya rasaṃ sāyitvā … kāyena phoṭṭhabbaṃ phusitvā … manasā dhammaṃ viññāya na nimittaggāhī hoti nānubyañjanaggāhī, yatvādhikaraṇamenaṃ manindriyaṃ asaṃvutaṃ viharantaṃ abhijjhādomanassā pāpakā akusalā dhammā anvāssaveyyuṃ, tassa saṃvarāya paṭipajjati; rakkhati manindriyaṃ; manindriye saṃvaraṃ āpajjati. Evaṃ kho, bhikkhave, bhikkhu indriyesu guttadvāro hoti.

“And how does a monk guard the doors of his sense faculties? Here a monk, on seeing a form with the vision, doesn’t prehend any attunements (representations) or distinctive features on account of which—if he were to dwell without restraint over the faculty of the vision—greed, dejection and other vicious, unskillful modes of conduct would flow in. He practices with restraint. He guards the faculty of the vision. He achieves restraint with regard to the faculty of the vision.
“On hearing a sound with the hearing.…
“On smelling an odour with the olfaction.…
“On tasting a flavour with the gustation.…
“On sensing a tangible with the tactile perception.…
“On cognizing an idea with the imagination, he doesn’t prehend any attunements (representations) or distinctive features on account of which—if he were to dwell without restraint over the faculty of the imagination—greed, dejection and other vicious, unskillful modes of conduct would flow in. He practices with restraint. He guards the faculty of the imagination. He achieves restraint with regard to the faculty of the imagination. This is how a monk guards the doors of his sense faculties.”
User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 5409
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm
Location: Whitby, Canada

Re: Yatvādhikaraṇamenaṃ (yatvādhikaraṇametaṃ)

Post by Coëmgenu »

"Prehend" is a very obscure word, I will say. Most people have absolutely no native intuition of what it means. Why this specifically? It is because of that?
Thomas the Bodhi-Wizard concluded: "And so ends the big hurly-burly to do with nothing." Frampton the Initiate responded: "Has the Lord spoken of these truths that we may go forth from duḥkha's realm ascending to the abode of superiority? Has he disclosed various paths, purifying all sentient beings, that they leave myriad afflictions and duḥkha, and they obtain the abode of true suchness?" "No," spake Thomas, "It's a metaphor, idiot. It accomplishes nothing. You just calm down a bit."

They rejoiced and lauded.

(from the Sūtra of Dubious Import)
User avatar
Assaji
Posts: 2043
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 7:24 pm

Re: Yatvādhikaraṇamenaṃ (yatvādhikaraṇametaṃ)

Post by Assaji »

Coëmgenu wrote: Mon Jun 14, 2021 5:07 pm "Prehend" is a very obscure word, I will say. Most people have absolutely no native intuition of what it means. Why this specifically? It is because of that?
I have replied to you in the gaṇhāti thread.
sphairos
Posts: 811
Joined: Mon Jun 21, 2010 4:37 am

Re: Yatvādhikaraṇamenaṃ (yatvādhikaraṇametaṃ)

Post by sphairos »

Here is some relevant info:

"5.14 Sutta no. 497. Yatehi paccattavacanassa to nidānādīsu

When followed by the word nidāna (cause, origin), nominative case after ya
and ta sometimes becomes ‘to’, for instance, yatonidānaṃ (Because of this, so,
therefore, on account of which), tatonidānaṃ, yatvādhikaraṇa. Here, the suffix ‘to’ is
not the ablative case, whereas nidānaṃ is in a neutral case.
[yaṃ+nidānaṃ>yatonidānaṃ] [taṃ+nidānaṃ>tatonidānaṃ] [yaṃ+nidānaṃ>
yato+adhikaraṇa yatvādhikaraṇa]

In Sanskrit, the suffix ‘as’ after the word ‘yat’ is changed to ‘o’ when added to
adhikaraṇa. [yaṃ>yaḥ>yā>yat+as+adhikaraṇa>yatoadhikaraṇa>yatvādhikaraṇa]

According to Nirutti-dīpanī, these words yatvādhikaraṇaṃ, yatonidānaṃ,
tatonidānaṃ, kena kāraṇena and taṃ kissahetu are said as hetvattha (“in the sense of
cause”).384

According to the book the Syntax of the Cases in the Pāḷi Nikāyas:
The logical function of the ablative denotes that from which something results
as a consequence. In general, ablative may express many different shades of
the notion of causality. Sanskrit uses ablative not only in the sense of “from
what side (usually the cause)” but also “on what side”. The ending –taḥ (Pāḷi
–to) is employed as preference. 385

Thus, the suffix ‘to’ is used in this sutta. "

P. 101

https://bhikkhunilienanh.files.wordpres ... ppa_an.pdf

So the basic meaning of this expression is "cause".

The Sanskrit ablative yatas means "from which", adhikaraṇa - "relation", "reference" etc. So, keeping it as literal as possible, "from which relation" or "in relation to from which". Close to "on account of which"
How good and wonderful are your days,
How true are your ways?
User avatar
frank k
Posts: 1367
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2011 4:55 pm
Contact:

Re: Yatvādhikaraṇamenaṃ (yatvādhikaraṇametaṃ)

Post by frank k »

Assaji wrote: Mon Jun 14, 2021 5:00 pm ...
I'm missing some nuance. Even in B. Bodhi's original translation 20 years ago from English, it was always clear to me reading the passage that one is not suppose to grab on to [erroneous perceptions] of signs and features of sensory data, which would cause evil unskillful Dharmas to arise.
I didn't even see how there were other ways to interpret the passage. What are the other interpretations people are having? And what did you convince B. Bodhi of in that discussion, what is different about his new understanding from his original translation?

Where are the two dolphins BTW? I see two white ones that might be dolphins that are completely separated from the man and woman, with their heads near the top. Is that the right one? Or is here suppose to be more detailed dophins that include the image of teh man and woman?
www.lucid24.org/sted : ☸Lucid24.org🐘 STED definitions
www.audtip.org/audtip: 🎙️🔊Audio Tales in Pāli: ☸Dharma and Vinaya in many languages
User avatar
Assaji
Posts: 2043
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 7:24 pm

Re: Yatvādhikaraṇamenaṃ (yatvādhikaraṇametaṃ)

Post by Assaji »

frank k wrote: Tue Jun 15, 2021 2:35 pm I'm missing some nuance. Even in B. Bodhi's original translation 20 years ago from English, it was always clear to me reading the passage that one is not suppose to grab on to [erroneous perceptions] of signs and features of sensory data, which would cause evil unskillful Dharmas to arise.
I didn't even see how there were other ways to interpret the passage. What are the other interpretations people are having?
AFAIK, most people read it as just some enigmatic expression.
And what did you convince B. Bodhi of in that discussion, what is different about his new understanding from his original translation?
Previously he applied yatvādhikaraṇamenaṃ to words that follow:
Having seen a form with the eye, do not grasp its signs and features. Since, if you leave the eye faculty unguarded, evil unwholesome states of covetousness and displeasure might invade you, practise the way of its restraint, guard the eye faculty, undertake the restraint of the eye faculty.
https://suttacentral.net/sn35.127/en/bodhi

In this discussion, he agreed to apply yatvādhikaraṇamenaṃ to the preceding words:
Bhikkhu Bodhi wrote: Fri Oct 27, 2017 10:03 am "Since on that account [on account of seizing upon the nimitta and anubyañjana], craving and dejection--bad unwholesome qualities--would invade him while he dwells unrestrained over the eye-faculty, he practices for its restraint ..."
frank k wrote: Tue Jun 15, 2021 2:35 pm Where are the two dolphins BTW? I see two white ones that might be dolphins that are completely separated from the man and woman, with their heads near the top. Is that the right one? Or is here suppose to be more detailed dophins that include the image of teh man and woman?
Here are the dolphins:

Image
Post Reply