Re: Samathanimitta

From: Assaji
Message: 5131
Date: 2019-03-02

Dear Bhante and Jim,


The word upalakkhetabbākāraṃ may be functioning as a bahubbihi compound qualifying an implicit ya … ta “that which” construction. Thus we might reformulate the sentence to make this explicit:


     Kasiṇanimittaṃ viya saññāṇaṃ viya saviggahaṃ viya ca ya suṭṭhu upalakkhetabbākāraṃ, ta ‘‘nimittan’ti vuccati.


I would understand viya as used here to have the function of citing examples rather than of making a comparison. And I would take saññāṇaṃ to be a mark or sign (an objective basis for subjective recognition = saññā). This may seem arbitrary, but an external mark of the object fits better with the other examples cited, kasinanimitta and saviggaham.


Thank you very much for explanations and translations!

This accords with the explanations in Dhammasaṅgaṇī-anuṭīkā:

Saññāṇaṃ upalakkhaṇaṃ. Saviggahaṃ sabimbakaṃ. Upalakkhetabbākāraṃ dhammajātaṃ, ārammaṇaṃ vā.

https://tipitaka.org/romn/cscd/abh04t.nrf3.xml

Let me describe the essence of my research: when one takes note of the marks of each citta which arises due to contact with the selected type of bases (arammana), and measures it against selected satipatthana criteria, one can remember and keep in mind the marks of most optimal state obtained so far, by these criteria, when making the next contact. This enables the steady progress in satipatthana, in development of bojjhangas.

It's also possible that the sentence as it has come down in this version of the ṭīkā has been corrupted. Is there another non-Burmese version of this ṭīkā against which the CST version can be checked?


There's a printed Thai edition:

ธรรมสังคณีมูลฎีกา, Anandācariyena, Mūnnithi Phūmiphalō Phikkhu, 1979


which I don't have, with the closest library 2300 km away. Perhaps someone here will kindly look it up?

With metta,
                     Dmytro (Assaji)
 



On 2/27/2019 8:38 AM, jimanderson.on@... [palistudy] wrote:

 

Hi Dmytro,

I've been looking at the grammar of the following Mūlaṭīkā sentence you quoted:

Kasiṇanimittaṃ viya saññāṇaṃ viya saviggahaṃ viya ca suṭṭhu upalakkhetabbākāraṃ ‘‘nimittan’ti vuccati.

I'm wondering why "upalakkhetabbākāraṃ" isn't in the nominative case (-ākāro) in agreement with "vuccati". If it's not the subject, then where is it? The sentence that comes after "vuccati" is: Samatho ca evaṃ ākāroti ‘‘nimitta’’nti vutto. One possibility might be that the "samatho" in the Aṭṭhasālinī comment is understood to be the subject of vuccati and " upalakkhetabbākāraṃ" is an adjectival compound modifying "nimittaṃ".

Best wishes, Jim

------------------------
From: palistudy@yahoogroups.com <palistudy@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2019 7:11 AM
To: palistudy@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [palistudy] Samathanimitta

Dear Pali friends,

I am struggling with some Pali passages which are important for my research on Samatha training methods.

Commentary to Sangiti sutta from Digha Nikaya and to Dhammasangani states:

Samathova taṃ ākāraṃ gahetvā puna pavattetabbassa samathassa nimittavasena samathanimittaṃ.

The attunement to serenity is an attunement, by power of which one can make serenity to reoccur, having learned [previously] the mode of [attaining] serenity.

[...]

-- 
Ven. Bhikkhu Bodhi
Chuang Yen Monastery
2020 Route 301
Carmel NY 10512
U.S.A.

Sabbe sattā averā hontu, abyāpajjā hontu, anighā hontu, sukhī hontu!
願眾生無怨,願眾生無害,願眾生無惱,願眾生快樂!
May all beings be free from enmity, free from affliction, free from distress. May they be happy!


Previous in thread: 5130
Previous message: 5130
Next message: 5132

Contemporaneous posts     Posts in thread     all posts