Hi, Sean,

> Saddha even during the Buddha's time was a very important factor

(actually

> *the* important factor for people entering the path) and is not

indicating

> 'blind faith', but the conviction that arises from seeing the

drawbacks of

> sensuality. I would say saddhaaya is an instrumental, but not

meaning

> 'with' but 'by' or 'through'. I prefer 'through'.

We're getting down to some subtle points here, but I would say that
the difference between ablative and instrumental here would be that
ablative would suggest motivation purely by faith -- i.e., "blind"
faith, if you like -- whereas instrumental would suggest some initial
dawning of awareness, coupled by a faith that it is worth proceeding
on.

The fact that the commentator contrasts saddhaaya with a string of
ablatives suggests that he thinks that saddhaaya itself is also
ablative.

But I agree with you that the instrumental makes more sense. An
ablative reading is too "pious," if you like.

One question that occurs to me: To a native speaker of Pali (if there
ever were such a thing!) would this distinction really exist, since
the word forms are actually the same in Pali?

But then again, if the verse was not originally cast in Pali but in
some related MIA dialect, would the instrumental and ablative forms
in that dialect also be the same?

Well, I think I've posed enough trifling questions for one day! Don't
answer if you don't want to!

Derek.