Saṃsāra vs Saṃskāra

Question

Saṃsāra (cycle of birth and death) and Saṃskāra (mental formations) seem to be semantically close to one another in the sense that Saṃskāra in the form of unwholesome seeds and habit energies would feed into the endless cycle of Saṃsāra and keep it going.

Given the uncanny phonetic similarity between these two terms, I was just wondering if they are indeed etymologically related and how this conception of present inclinations being dictated by past experiences fit into Buddhist philosophy as a whole.

Answer 1

As other people said, sam- stands for "togetherness", "sara" stands for "flowing" and "kara" stands for "making".

So the two words are, roughly, "together-flowing" and "together-making".

For me, "Together-flowing" invokes an image of stream infinitely rushing on and yet staying in the same place, like a river. This is a metaphor for the "stream" of the infinitely chaining/forking/joining causes-and-effects that make up the lives of countless generations of sentient beings.

"Together-making" invokes an image of something assembled from multiple parts where these parts condition each other into staying together. That's an abstract term referring to the semi-stable bundles of causes/conditions that come together to produce and sustain (or become and be) every single phenomenon (except Nirvana which is not really an individual phenomenon but I must say it's not a bundle).

In the absolute sense the causal bundles are not good or bad, they just are, but practically speaking some causal bundles are manifestations of bad karma that create experience of suffering or worse, help sustain karmically negative "vicious circles".

So to answer your first question, the two words are not etymologically related except through their common prefix pointing out that both concepts have an element of "togetherness" or co-conditioning.

As to your deeper question, you are correct in your assumption that Samsara is sustained by the effects of the past feeding forward to be the causes of the new, ad infinitum. In my understanding, the samskaras are always cyclic as well, at least to some degree - otherwise they would instantly disband right after coming together.

This principle of causation having a tendency to be self-sustaining is an important part of the Buddhist philosophy both at the everyday level (bad deeds are bad karma, violence begets violence etc) and the level of spiritual practice in pursuit of Enlightenment, since the very Noble Path is a virtuous cycle or spiral.

Answer 2

This Glossary transliterates it as

• saṃsāra and saṅkhāra

The PTS dictionary has it as:

• saŋsāra and sankhāra

Note:

• The PTS dictionary defines the saŋ prefix as meaning something like, "one", "same", primarily "together", also "accentuated".
• That's about the same as the meaning the Glossary gives for the saṃ prefix
• So I think they're the same -- the difference is only in how they're transliterated (into a more-or-less Latin alphabet).

As for the roots:

• The PTS dictionary gives the root saarati which means to "flow", "move", "run along".
• Conversely the Glossary says that the root of saṅkhāra is karoti meaning "make, do, cause, cause to become, perform act".

So I think they have the same (very common) "prefix", and different "roots".

Answer 3

With all due consideration,

The Pali sam-, san- preffix is the equivalent of the English com-, con-.

Since samsara is the opposite of nibbana, which is the unconditioned, the most accurate term for qualifying both samsara and sankhara would be conditioned or conditional, pertaining to conditions. Also, many suttas explain that conditional existence samsara is the sum of all conditioned phenomena sabbe sankhara.

The conclusions that arise are graphically sketched as follows.

Respectfully

Answer 4

The term 'saṅkhāra' does not necessary infer unwholesomeness. The term 'saṅkhāra' is used in many ways, such as in 'kayasaṅkhāra', meaning 'in & out breathing' ('body-condition'; 'body-conditioner'; MN 44) and 'ayusankhara' ('life-condition'; 'life-conditioner'; 'life-force'; MN 43). SN 54.11 for example describes the Buddha calming the kayasankhara & cittasankhara. Or SN 22.85 makes it clear an Arahant has five aggregates, including saṅkhāra aggregate. 'Unwholesome seeds' and 'habitual energies' are called 'anusaya' and 'asava' in Pali rather than 'sankhara'.

The term 'saṁsāra' is always unwholesome, referring to the mind 'continually moving about' due to ignorance & craving continuously grasping the five aggregates as 'self'. Refer to SN 22.99.

The dictionary says about these two words:

• saṅkhāra = saṁ + kṛ (kāra adjective & noun; doing, making; a maker, a worker; from kār-, Vedic kāra... derived from kṛ)
• saṁsāra = from saṁsarati = saṁ + sar + a = saṁ + sarati (sarati to go, flow, run, move along)

In summary, both words sharing the same prefix (saṁ) does not mean they have an inherent etymologically relationship. For example, the exclusively wholesome terms 'sambojjhaṅga' ('factors of enlightenment') and 'sampajañña' ('situational understanding') probably share the same prefix (saṁ) as 'saṅkhāra' and 'saṁsāra'.

The prefix 'saṁ' generally means 'together with'. I guess:

• Saṅkhāra means 'together/joint (saṅ) construction (karoti)'.
• Sampajañña means 'together/associated (situational) wisdom'.
• Sambojjhaṅga means 'constituent of/accompaniments/companions of enlightenment'.
• Saṁsāra means (?? I am not sure ??) maybe 'roaming together with ignorance & craving' (???).

Terms often have an etymologically relationship when they share the same root, possibly such as 'saṅkhāra' & 'kamma' sharing the root 'kar' or 'karoti' (although I am not 100% sure about this example).

However, sharing a root also does not necessarily imply sharing meaning. For example, the Pali terms 'upapanna' and 'paṭipanna' share the same root ('pad') but the respective prefix gives these two terms a different meaning. 'Upapanna' means 'travel in a similar direction' where as 'paṭipanna' means 'travel in an opposite direction'.

There are multi-linguists on this forum with far better language knowledge than I.

Answer 5

Actually its san+sāra and san+kāra.

I think prefix san means natural.or unconscious. and we know that the root of nature is three defilement i.e rāga,dosa and moha.

The action i.e kāra which are triggered by san is called sanskāra. i.e a natural action.

and due to momentum of sankhāra you continue the cycle of rebirth or bhavcakra or paticcasamuppada.

Sansāra is another name of cycle of rebirth. because defilements or nature is the essence(sāra) of cycle of rebirth.

In Pali the word 'Nissāra' means escape from Sansāra. but ideally it should means essence-less-ness.

In Sanskrit and in many indian language, we still use these two words in modern time too. Though with different meaning.i.e sansāra as the world and sanskāra as behaviour inherited from parents and teachers.

I got to think about san by reading this link.

according to him san means defilement. tesan means three defilement i.e rāga,dosa and moha.

However I think he is cought up by defining every word starting with san or sam rooted in 3 defilements.

But by closely studding all words in that website, I found the word 'nature' suits more to san. though indirectly it means three core defilements only. but not for all words.. the meaning 'nature' or prakriti suits to all word though.