Pali √as āsiṃ atthi

[Rabbit]

Hi. A question about Pali.

Does āsiṃ, translated as “I was”, mean atthi, i.e., “I existed as”?

Also, is the word “sat” in the dictionary below English or is it Pali?

Can āsiṃ be translated as “I existed as”?

Thanks

[Khemarato.bhikkhu]

@Rabbit

Does āsiṃ, translated as “I was”, mean atthi, i.e., “I existed as”?

Yes? atthi is the third person present (“He is”) and āsiṃ is the first person aorist (“I was”)

@Rabbit

“sat” in the dictionary below English or is it Pali?

? English… The same root as the Pāḷi word āsana = seat

Remember that in the aorist, verbs get a a- prefix. So √as here is becoming ās- (this is different than the √ās root which means “sit” )

@Rabbit

Can āsiṃ be translated as “I existed as”?

Usually, I would think of abhaviṃ or some such for “I existed (as)” What’s wrong with “I was”?

[Rabbit]

@Khemarato.bhikkhu

What’s wrong with “I was”?

Thanks. “I existed as” has the connotation found in SN 12.15 of atthita.

[Khemarato.bhikkhu]

@Rabbit

found in SN 12.15 of atthita.

atthitaṁ is a noun. In the example in the OP it is the verb. Same root, but a (slightly) different word.

[Rabbit]

@Khemarato.bhikkhu

atthitaṁ is a noun. In the example in the OP it is the verb. Same root, but a (slightly) different word.

I meant to say atthi in SN 12.15 has the connotation of a wrong view. The translation of “I was” is very plain and does not have the sense of atthi-view or atthi-notion in it.

“Kaccāna, this world mostly relies on the dual notions of existence and non-existence.

“Dvayanissito khvāyaṁ, kaccāna, loko yebhuyyena—atthitañceva natthitañca

SN 12.15