SDC wrote: ↑Mon Oct 11, 2021 4:55 pm
I have no idea of what you mean.
What is pointless to me is when you define āhāra as only "nutriment", and that you don't add to it the second meaning of āhāra, which is "fetching" — in that case, fetching the nutriment.
What is pointless is to still translate vicikicchā as "doubt", when the real meaning of it is "deviant thinking" (with the cit/citta).
That's pointless. Because it does not explain at what level the deviant thinking is made.
Another instance of what I find pointless, is when every translators (plagiarizing one another endlessly), translate "hoti" in "imasmiṃ sati idaṃ hoti", as "that is"; when "hoti" comes from the root hū and not bhū. "Hoti" means "calls" — Warder explains it.
And a knowledge of Veda, and in this case the importance of the "call" in Véda, would make things definitely clearer.
What I found pointless is not to follow the processes described in the Suttas with parallels, and that are described in this simple sketch.
Processes that involve descents (pad/avakkanti) and feedbacks up ( paccaya, etc).
For this is what the suttas with parallels, or logically complemental suttas say.
Buddha didn't wait for people to interpret wrong meanings, wrong grammar, or a modern interpretation of a lousy knowledge of the philosophy of his time.
What I also find pointless is the sophistry to cover that.
Sorry to be so frank and blunt.
That's the way "I am" — but it's not my real self.