Understanding / Communicating (not for the 6000 year old word adverse)

[Gary]

I would appreciate an example(s) of a Sanskrit, or Pali word(s) that
engenders a better form of communication and improved understanding
versus using modern day English to represent the same ideas. ( I know
that this has been discussed within many other threads and examples
provided..especially by Ram, but I would like to discuss specific
examples.)

[MarkJ]

I am not a scholar of classical languages but from past studies of
eastern languages (mainly Hebrew and Greek) the paradigm between the
two appears to be in the 'action' of the words.
Western language was noun based for the most part and Eastern was verb
based for the most part.

A crude representation to illustrate would be to compare the
understanding of the term 'being'.
Western language would generally denote this idea as the outlined
figure of a person.
Eastern language would generally denote this idea as the action of a
living principle.

This is an example of how the two worlds express ideas not a direct
example of the definition of the word being.

Obviously, this has transformed since the blending of understandings
through the last 100 years but at the heart is this paradigm, at least
from my experience and that is only as accurate as the device used to
measure it. Which is only so, so.


Mark

[Ram]

Hi Gary,

I would be willing to participate and contribute to this thread when I
have more time. I'm pretty busy these days. I guess with the caveat
that there is agreement among posters that the purpose of perpetuating
the thread would be to explore the meaning of various Sanskrit words
and phrases, rather than to debate or argue about whether or not they
are necessary for self-realization or can be translated and expressed
equally as well in English. It's a given that English would be used to
explore the meanings and subtleties of such words.

A limitation that I see in having this type of discussion about
Sanskrit words or phrases is when they are being used in the context
of repetition of Mantra, or chanting and singing (Kirtan/Bhajan) of
Sanskrit words, where the talking and thinking about the meaning words
pales in significance, when compared to the experiencing of the
meaning of the word by the word itself. (Thats not to say that English
words or phrases can't be used as mantra or for chanting equally
effectively.) In this context, what is a 'word' anymore when the
meaning of the word moves from being understood merely on an
intellectual level to being understood on a purely experiential level
where the intellect falls to the wayside?

For example, if there was one among us who had not tasted sugar. We
could talk to that person about how the sweetness of candy, or donuts,
or ice cream, or fruit, etc., is the sweetness of sugar. But until the
person actually put sugar on the tongue, the sweetness of sugar will
not be experienced. Same goes for the fragrance or a rose, or odor or
dogshit, or color for a blind person.

One quick example of words that have tossed around previously on this
group that comes to mind arethe words Turya and Turyatita. Turya can
be translated in English as "fourth" and turyatita as "beyond fourth."
But what is the meaning of fourth and beyond fourth? Fourth what? In
relation to what, is "fourth," and "beyond fourth"? It could even be
said that turyatita is in relation to fourth but at the same time is
not in relation to anything. An enigmatic statement that is only
understood in non-conceptual understanding, or "MahaAnubhava" which
could be translated as "great experience" or the experience of "no
experience." Buy how does one get one's mind around the non-conceptual
experience of no experience?

So, to avoid debate about whether or not Sanskrit words are necessary,
or can or cannot be translated into English, let's just agree to say
at the outset that they are not necessary, and that they can be
translated, and then see if we want to pursue this topic.

[Gary]

MarkJ:

Alan Watts brings up a similar discussion with regards to Chinese.
The cosmology, language and to some extent the culture arise from a
verb oriented bias, vs. a noun bias in the English/Latin based
languages. He was interested in unexamined assumptions and points out
that many are imbedded in the grammatical structure. You are
fortunate to have some experience on both sides of the linguistic
track.

[Gary]

Ram:

I argue against the use of Sanskrit without explanation as a matter of
clarity on this board. I haven't any real opposition to the use of
non-English. It is clear that many here have a preference for the use
of languages other than English and I am curious as to why and what
this brings to the table. I find pointers most useful when I have
some foundation upon which to look beyond the finger. Personally, I
find the Indian cosmology/tradition(s) to be complex in the same way
that I find the traditional Catholic maze of beliefs and assumptions
beyond my understanding. I appreciate simplification, which I believe
that you provide. I remember a time in my life when I would go to bed
every night listening to the recitation of one, or another of the
Vedic hymns. I found the sound to be about as understandable as the
English translations and far more enjoyable.

[Anandanand]

Like we have different programming languages for software meant for
different uses, similarly languages have a marked tilt towards
different aspects of society. As far as my knowledge goes, Sanskrit is
not same if taken from different historical periods (As is with any
language). Some of the Mahavakya's may not have been so when written/
said e.g. "Tattvamasi" meaning 'You are that', today 'Tattvanasi' has
only one meaning, 'You are that' will have the same meaning if not
used otherwise, but it is used otherwise, and Sanskrit (barring a few
who talk in Sanskrit with each other) is no more a common
communication language.

[Mahakali]

no..really no more words...

I think I'll drop this one...

Thank you

Kali

On Aug 19, 11:13 pm, Gary <contaxg...@gmail.com> wrote: