<p>This dictionary says that <a href="https://suttacentral.net/define/yath%C4%81bh%C5%ABta" rel="nofollow noreferrer">yathābhūta
</a> is an adjective, whereas <a href="https://suttacentral.net/define/yath%C4%81bh%C5%ABta%E1%B9%83" rel="nofollow noreferrer">yathābhūtaṃ</a> is an adverb</p>

<p>I haven't seen how <em>yathābhūta</em> is used in practice. Where is <em>yathābhūta</em> even used? I can only find <em>yathābhūtaṃ</em>. </p>

<p>But grammatically I presume that an "adjective" would qualify a noun (e.g. "he sees a <em>true</em> thing"), whereas an "adverb" qualifies a verb (e.g. "he <em>truly</em> sees a thing").</p>

<hr>

<p><strong>I know the blank space might change the context, but I've found the 4 variations, so I'm hopping you know something more about this</strong></p>

<p>I don't know about the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pali#Writing" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Pali scripts</a>, but in some scripts there are no blank spaces in the script, forexamplethetextiswrittenlikethis and it's up to the reader to know where each word ends (I think it's like that when you have to understand any spoken language too).</p>

<p>Furthermore (or rather, more importantly), Pali (like German) has <a href="https://dhamma.ru/paali/Pali_compounds.htm" rel="nofollow noreferrer">compound words</a>.</p>

<p>English has some compound words too, like "butter knife" and "farsighted".</p>

<p>So for example <a href="https://suttacentral.net/sn12.23/en/sujato" rel="nofollow noreferrer">SN 12.23</a> includes:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>I say that truly knowing and seeing has a vital condition.<br>
  Yathābhūtañāṇadassanampāhaṃ, bhikkhave, saupanisaṃ vadāmi, no anupanisaṃ.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>More literally:</p>

<p>"Truly-knowing-and-seeing, monks, I say, is not without a condition."</p>

<p>To translate a long, compound word like "Yathābhūtañāṇadassanampāhaṃ" you deconstruct it into its various component root words.</p>

<hr>

<p><strong>I have two more questions: Can yathābhūta be used as a term or should it be always used in a sentece? If it can be used as a term, how would you translate it?</strong></p>

<p>Dictionary definitions of the roots of the word are:</p>

<ul>
<li><a href="http://dsalsrv02.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/philologic/getobject.pl?c.3:1:264.pali" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Yathā</a> (i.e. "according to" or "in accordance with")</li>
<li><a href="http://dsalsrv02.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/philologic/getobject.pl?c.2:1:3646.pali" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Bhūta</a> (i.e. "natural", "genuine", "true").</li>
</ul>

<p>So "according to the truth" or "true" or "truly" is a common translation.</p>

<p><em>Bhūta</em> also apparently means things like "creatures", "beings", "<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_(biology)" rel="nofollow noreferrer">biological kingdoms</a>", "elements" -- so I might translate it as "seeing things <em>according to their nature</em>", or "seeing the nature of thing" (or, possibly, "naturally seeing things" or "seeings things naturally").</p>

<p>It could be translated "seeing things in their proper categories" -- for example <a href="https://suttacentral.net/an4.179/en/sujato" rel="nofollow noreferrer">AN 4.179</a> ...</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>Reverend Ānanda, it’s because some sentient beings don’t really understand which perceptions make things worse, which keep things steady, which lead to distinction, and which lead to penetration.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>... talks about "really understanding" whether a perception belongs to one of three or four categories.</p>

<p>It also means "everything", "nature", and "the result of becoming" -- so it might mean "seeing things <em>as natural</em>".
Buddhism has a lot to say about "all created things" (e.g. it says <em>sabbe sankhara anicca</em>) ... so perhaps that too should be included in the view (see e.g. <a href="https://suttacentral.net/sn22.55/en/sujato" rel="nofollow noreferrer">SN 22.55</a>).</p>

<p>According to the context in which it's used (in sentences, in suttas), it's often associated with samadhi and enlightenment.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2018-06-01T10:33:34.383Z
I agree with the above answer. I could only find the word yathābhūtaṃ in the suttas. Click on the link: https://legacy.suttacentral.net/search?query=yath%C4%81bhuta&lang=
Dhamma Dhatu
CC BY-SA 4.0
2018-06-01T15:56:00.520Z
Thanks for the answer. I'm still confused in some way. Perhaps, I'm making a mistake. The term I'm looking for tells to look at reality "as it is". I just read one of Osho's books an he uses the term "yatha bhtuam" to make this point out, but in some other sources I've found it written as "yatha bhuta" like in this link [Reality in Buddhism] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reality_in_Buddhism)  I know the blank space might change the context, but I've found the 4 variations, so I'm hopping you know something more about this. Thanks a lot!
Oscar
CC BY-SA 4.0
2018-06-01T19:57:56.843Z
@Oscar I added to the answer ... does that answer your query?
ChrisW
CC BY-SA 4.0
2018-06-01T10:04:29.703Z
2018-06-04T23:23:27.710Z
2018-06-04T23:23:27.710Z
ChrisW
<p>Yathābhūta is not correct in pali-sentence. We have to put the declension-mark at the end of yathābhūta, such as  yathābhūtaṃ, before put it in the sentence.</p>

<p>Yathābhūta is adjective/adverb <strong>which is not complete, not ready to use</strong>, because the properties of word (vibhatti;case-endings;declension):  preposition(sambandha), amount(vacana), and gender(liṅga), etc., must put at the end of every words, except ready-made-noun (nipāta), some standalone-prefix (upasagga-nipāta; <em>I'm not sure for linguistic name</em>), and compound-word (samāsa). So, it can not come alone, and you can not found <strong>only yathābhūta</strong>  alone in pāli. It should to be yathābhūtaṃ (si-vibhatti), <strong>yathābhūta</strong>ñāṇadassanaṃ (Deleted vibhatti because of compound-word; Vibhatti still be, but it disappear by pali-processing), yathābhūtena (nā-vibhatti), etc.</p>

<p>See: <a href="http://www.buddha-vacana.org/toolbox/noundec.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">http://www.buddha-vacana.org/toolbox/noundec.html</a></p>

<h2>For the explanation of the term "yathābhūta":</h2>

<p>Yathā ... tathā = How it is ... as it is.</p>

<p>Bhūta = arising/becomming = <strong>upatti-bhava-paṭiccasamuppāda</strong> = upatti-becoming = jāti(rebirth) + jarā&amp;maraṇa (old-age&amp;death). bhū-root[as arise-term]+ta-suffix[as verb].</p>

<p>Arising of what? Arising of 5 aggregates in paṭiccasamuppāda-cycle. So: </p>

<ol>
<li>in Sutta. Saṃ. Saḷa. <a href="http://www.84000.org/tipitaka/pitaka_item/r.php?B=18&amp;A=5092&amp;eng=accesstoinsight_wlsh" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Dukkhadhammasutta</a>, buddha use yathābhūta
as <strong>arising</strong> and <strong>vanishing</strong> of 5 aggregates;</li>
<li>In Sutta. Saṃ. Ni. <a href="http://www.84000.org/tipitaka/read/r.php?B=16&amp;A=1920&amp;eng=suttacentral" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Dukkhasutta</a>, buddha describe arising and
vanishing of 5 aggregates as <a href="http://84000.org/tipitaka/read/v.php?B=10&amp;A=1455&amp;Z=1887&amp;eng=metta_e2" rel="nofollow noreferrer">paṭiccasamuppāda</a>;</li>
<li>In <a href="http://www.buddha-vacana.org/sutta/digha/dn22.html#4B" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Khandhapabba</a> of Sutta. Ma. Mū. Mahāsatipaṭṭhānasutta, 
buddha describe arising and vanishing of 5 aggregates as
udayabbaya-ñāṇa-niddeso;</li>
<li>Also, in <a href="http://www.buddha-vacana.org/sutta/digha/dn22.html#4B" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Khandhapabba</a>, buddha describe vipassanā in <strong>arising</strong>
and <strong>vanishing</strong> of 5 aggregates as "samudayavaya<strong>dhammā</strong>nupassī
vā" which commentary refer that dhamma-term as
<a href="http://www.84000.org/tipitaka/pitaka_item/r.php?B=18&amp;A=5092&amp;eng=accesstoinsight_wlsh" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Dukkhadhammasutta</a>;</li>
<li>So, in Sutta. Khu. Paṭisambhidāmaggo
<a href="http://www.84000.org/tipitaka/read/roman_read.php?B=31&amp;A=1545" rel="nofollow noreferrer">udayabbayānupassanāñāṇa-niddesa</a> &amp; <a href="https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/nanamoli/PathofPurification2011.pdf" rel="nofollow noreferrer">the path of purification</a>
maggāmaggañāṇadassanavisuddhiniddesa udayabbayañāṇakathā, <strong>Master
Sāriputta and Master Buddhaghosa</strong> describe udayabbaya as
paṭiccasamuppāda as well.</li>
</ol>

<p>So, yathābhūta-ñāṇa is understanding of arising of 5 aggregates in paṭiccasamuppāda-cycle. </p>

<p>Another, I also describe yathābhūta in this answer: <a href="https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/a/26702/10100">https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/a/26702/10100</a></p>

<p>Buddha have to cut the big sutta in DN/MN for the students who not smart enough to enlighten/understand/memorize at once. So, you can notice my reference are from DN&amp;MN&amp;SN&amp;KN, and actually AN as well.</p>

<p><strong>Pāli has a very strong structure. This is the reason why we can understand tipitaka's content by just fluent reciting&amp;memorizing.</strong> But because of the complicate detail of Dhamma, so when we translate tipitaka to the other languages, such as english or especilly thai, we will lose many important words' properties. Then we can not understand/analysis/find the fact from some translation.</p>

<p><em>"Svākkhāto bhagavatā dhammo-the best dhamma was taught by buddha." is not just the psalms, but it is the fact by the linguistics and the truth.</em></p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2018-06-02T02:04:03.893Z
To summarise: in Pali, an adjective is declined to match the noun it qualifies -- i.e. to match the noun's gender (masculine, feminine, or neuter), the noun's case (e.g. nominative, accusative, etc.), and whether the noun is singular or plural. Therefore you won't find the adjective *yathābhūta* written as such, because when it's used in a sentence its ending changes (to match its noun) according to the rules of declension.
ChrisW
CC BY-SA 4.0
2018-06-02T02:33:01.767Z
@ChrisW You shouldn't summarize like that because yathābhūta can qualifies verb, too. And when it  qualifies verb, it will not depend on verb's vibhatti or noun's vibhatti, it will use only karana-vibhatti to be adverb. **The summary should be something like this:  yathābhūta is not correct in sentence. We have to put the declension-mark at the end of yathābhūta, such as  yathābhūtaṃ, before put it in the sentence.**
Bonn
CC BY-SA 4.0
2018-06-03T06:45:44.720Z
Thanks Bonn and @Chris. You've been really helpful.  As far as I understand *yathābhūtaṃ* will add a relation to what in English would be the pronoun *it*, am I right?  I have two more questions:  Can  *yathābhūta* be used as a term or should it be always used in a sentece?  If it can be used as a term, how would you translate it?
Oscar
CC BY-SA 4.0
2018-06-04T23:23:55.173Z
@Oscar I edited my answer again to try to answer your question.
ChrisW
CC BY-SA 4.0
2018-06-05T01:10:01.367Z
I edited my answer for you both. It looks too much pali and reference. But it's good for understanding whole tipitaka.
Bonn
CC BY-SA 4.0
2018-06-05T19:04:58.527Z
Wonderful explanation. Impressive, scholarly. Please continue doing good research and sharing.
Pasquale 
CC BY-SA 4.0
2018-06-08T20:13:41.237Z
Thanks a lot, @Bonn. Your explanation was completely helpful and clear. Now I'm even more interested in what comes around the term **yathābhūta**. I'll mark this question as answered.
Oscar
CC BY-SA 4.0
2018-06-02T01:36:35.083Z
2018-06-05T23:08:55.007Z
2018-06-05T23:08:55.007Z
Bonn
<p>I’ve been reading about this term and have found it written in both ways. I don’t know if the difference is related to some kind of verb form.</p>

<terminology><reality>
What’s the difference between yathābhūta and yathābhūtaṃ?
# What’s the difference between yathābhūta and yathābhūtaṃ?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2018-06-01)

I’ve been reading about this term and have found it written in both ways. I don’t know if the difference is related to some kind of verb form.

**Tags:** terminology, reality


---

## 2 answers

### Answer by username_3 on 2018-06-02. Score: 6 | Accepted answer

Yathābhūta is not correct in pali-sentence. We have to put the declension-mark at the end of yathābhūta, such as yathābhūtaṃ, before put it in the sentence.

Yathābhūta is adjective/adverb **which is not complete, not ready to use**, because the properties of word (vibhatti;case-endings;declension): preposition(sambandha), amount(vacana), and gender(liṅga), etc., must put at the end of every words, except ready-made-noun (nipāta), some standalone-prefix (upasagga-nipāta; *I'm not sure for linguistic name*), and compound-word (samāsa). So, it can not come alone, and you can not found **only yathābhūta** alone in pāli. It should to be yathābhūtaṃ (si-vibhatti), **yathābhūta**ñāṇadassanaṃ (Deleted vibhatti because of compound-word; Vibhatti still be, but it disappear by pali-processing), yathābhūtena (nā-vibhatti), etc.

See: <http://www.buddha-vacana.org/toolbox/noundec.html>

## For the explanation of the term "yathābhūta":

Yathā ... tathā = How it is ... as it is.

Bhūta = arising/becomming = **upatti-bhava-paṭiccasamuppāda** = upatti-becoming = jāti(rebirth) + jarā&maraṇa (old-age&death). bhū-root[as arise-term]+ta-suffix[as verb].

Arising of what? Arising of 5 aggregates in paṭiccasamuppāda-cycle. So:

1. in Sutta. Saṃ. Saḷa. [Dukkhadhammasutta](http://www.84000.org/tipitaka/pitaka_item/r.php?B=18&A=5092&eng=accesstoinsight_wlsh), buddha use yathābhūta
   as **arising** and **vanishing** of 5 aggregates;
2. In Sutta. Saṃ. Ni. [Dukkhasutta](http://www.84000.org/tipitaka/read/r.php?B=16&A=1920&eng=suttacentral), buddha describe arising and
   vanishing of 5 aggregates as [paṭiccasamuppāda](http://84000.org/tipitaka/read/v.php?B=10&A=1455&Z=1887&eng=metta_e2);
3. In [Khandhapabba](http://www.buddha-vacana.org/sutta/digha/dn22.html#4B) of Sutta. Ma. Mū. Mahāsatipaṭṭhānasutta,
   buddha describe arising and vanishing of 5 aggregates as
   udayabbaya-ñāṇa-niddeso;
4. Also, in [Khandhapabba](http://www.buddha-vacana.org/sutta/digha/dn22.html#4B), buddha describe vipassanā in **arising**
   and **vanishing** of 5 aggregates as "samudayavaya**dhammā**nupassī
   vā" which commentary refer that dhamma-term as
   [Dukkhadhammasutta](http://www.84000.org/tipitaka/pitaka_item/r.php?B=18&A=5092&eng=accesstoinsight_wlsh);
5. So, in Sutta. Khu. Paṭisambhidāmaggo
   [udayabbayānupassanāñāṇa-niddesa](http://www.84000.org/tipitaka/read/roman_read.php?B=31&A=1545) & [the path of purification](https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/nanamoli/PathofPurification2011.pdf)
   maggāmaggañāṇadassanavisuddhiniddesa udayabbayañāṇakathā, **Master
   Sāriputta and Master Buddhaghosa** describe udayabbaya as
   paṭiccasamuppāda as well.

So, yathābhūta-ñāṇa is understanding of arising of 5 aggregates in paṭiccasamuppāda-cycle.

Another, I also describe yathābhūta in this answer: <https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/a/26702/10100>

Buddha have to cut the big sutta in DN/MN for the students who not smart enough to enlighten/understand/memorize at once. So, you can notice my reference are from DN&MN&SN&KN, and actually AN as well.

**Pāli has a very strong structure. This is the reason why we can understand tipitaka's content by just fluent reciting&memorizing.** But because of the complicate detail of Dhamma, so when we translate tipitaka to the other languages, such as english or especilly thai, we will lose many important words' properties. Then we can not understand/analysis/find the fact from some translation.

*"Svākkhāto bhagavatā dhammo-the best dhamma was taught by buddha." is not just the psalms, but it is the fact by the linguistics and the truth.*

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: To summarise: in Pali, an adjective is declined to match the noun it qualifies -- i.e. to match the noun's gender (masculine, feminine, or neuter), the noun's case (e.g. nominative, accusative, etc.), and whether the noun is singular or plural. Therefore you won't find the adjective *yathābhūta* written as such, because when it's used in a sentence its ending changes (to match its noun) according to the rules of declension.  
> **username_3**: @username_1 You shouldn't summarize like that because yathābhūta can qualifies verb, too. And when it  qualifies verb, it will not depend on verb's vibhatti or noun's vibhatti, it will use only karana-vibhatti to be adverb. **The summary should be something like this:  yathābhūta is not correct in sentence. We have to put the declension-mark at the end of yathābhūta, such as  yathābhūtaṃ, before put it in the sentence.**  
> **username_0**: Thanks username_3 and @Chris. You've been really helpful.  As far as I understand *yathābhūtaṃ* will add a relation to what in English would be the pronoun *it*, am I right?  I have two more questions:  Can  *yathābhūta* be used as a term or should it be always used in a sentece?  If it can be used as a term, how would you translate it?  
> **username_1**: @username_0 I edited my answer again to try to answer your question.  
> **username_3**: I edited my answer for you both. It looks too much pali and reference. But it's good for understanding whole tipitaka.  
> **username_4**: Wonderful explanation. Impressive, scholarly. Please continue doing good research and sharing.  
> **username_0**: Thanks a lot, @username_3. Your explanation was completely helpful and clear. Now I'm even more interested in what comes around the term **yathābhūta**. I'll mark this question as answered.  

---

### Answer by username_1 on 2018-06-01. Score: 2

This dictionary says that [yathābhūta](https://suttacentral.net/define/yath%C4%81bh%C5%ABta) is an adjective, whereas [yathābhūtaṃ](https://suttacentral.net/define/yath%C4%81bh%C5%ABta%E1%B9%83) is an adverb

I haven't seen how *yathābhūta* is used in practice. Where is *yathābhūta* even used? I can only find *yathābhūtaṃ*.

But grammatically I presume that an "adjective" would qualify a noun (e.g. "he sees a *true* thing"), whereas an "adverb" qualifies a verb (e.g. "he *truly* sees a thing").

---

**I know the blank space might change the context, but I've found the 4 variations, so I'm hopping you know something more about this**

I don't know about the [Pali scripts](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pali#Writing), but in some scripts there are no blank spaces in the script, forexamplethetextiswrittenlikethis and it's up to the reader to know where each word ends (I think it's like that when you have to understand any spoken language too).

Furthermore (or rather, more importantly), Pali (like German) has [compound words](https://dhamma.ru/paali/Pali_compounds.htm).

English has some compound words too, like "butter knife" and "farsighted".

So for example [SN 12.23](https://suttacentral.net/sn12.23/en/sujato) includes:

> I say that truly knowing and seeing has a vital condition.  
> Yathābhūtañāṇadassanampāhaṃ, bhikkhave, saupanisaṃ vadāmi, no anupanisaṃ.

More literally:

"Truly-knowing-and-seeing, monks, I say, is not without a condition."

To translate a long, compound word like "Yathābhūtañāṇadassanampāhaṃ" you deconstruct it into its various component root words.

---

**I have two more questions: Can yathābhūta be used as a term or should it be always used in a sentece? If it can be used as a term, how would you translate it?**

Dictionary definitions of the roots of the word are:

* [Yathā](http://dsalsrv02.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/philologic/getobject.pl?c.3:1:264.pali) (i.e. "according to" or "in accordance with")
* [Bhūta](http://dsalsrv02.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/philologic/getobject.pl?c.2:1:3646.pali) (i.e. "natural", "genuine", "true").

So "according to the truth" or "true" or "truly" is a common translation.

*Bhūta* also apparently means things like "creatures", "beings", "[biological kingdoms](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_(biology))", "elements" -- so I might translate it as "seeing things *according to their nature*", or "seeing the nature of thing" (or, possibly, "naturally seeing things" or "seeings things naturally").

It could be translated "seeing things in their proper categories" -- for example [AN 4.179](https://suttacentral.net/an4.179/en/sujato) ...

> Reverend Ānanda, it’s because some sentient beings don’t really understand which perceptions make things worse, which keep things steady, which lead to distinction, and which lead to penetration.

... talks about "really understanding" whether a perception belongs to one of three or four categories.

It also means "everything", "nature", and "the result of becoming" -- so it might mean "seeing things *as natural*".
Buddhism has a lot to say about "all created things" (e.g. it says *sabbe sankhara anicca*) ... so perhaps that too should be included in the view (see e.g. [SN 22.55](https://suttacentral.net/sn22.55/en/sujato)).

According to the context in which it's used (in sentences, in suttas), it's often associated with samadhi and enlightenment.

> **Comments:**
> **username_2**: I agree with the above answer. I could only find the word yathābhūtaṃ in the suttas. Click on the link: https://legacy.suttacentral.net/search?query=yath%C4%81bhuta&lang=  
> **username_0**: Thanks for the answer. I'm still confused in some way. Perhaps, I'm making a mistake. The term I'm looking for tells to look at reality "as it is". I just read one of Osho's books an he uses the term "yatha bhtuam" to make this point out, but in some other sources I've found it written as "yatha bhuta" like in this link [Reality in Buddhism] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reality_in_Buddhism)  I know the blank space might change the context, but I've found the 4 variations, so I'm hopping you know something more about this. Thanks a lot!  
> **username_1**: @username_0 I added to the answer ... does that answer your query?  

---

