Re: Mahaaraahulovaadasutta, bhaavayato, and Co. to Jim

Dear Nina,

> Dear Jim and all,
> op 03-05-2003 17:48 schreef Jim Anderson op jimanderson_on@...:
> Could
> > this not be a genitive absolute construction as described by

Warder,

> > p. 58 or Duroiselle, no. 603?
> >
> > pathaviisama~nhi te, raahula, bhaavana.m bhaavayato, . . . -- M I

423

> >
> > For while (or when, as) you, Rahula, are developing the

development

> > that is like the earth, . . .
> N: I think it is likely, because the sentence has more than one

agent. the

> other being: the impressions, etc. phassaa.

Offlist, Teng Kee has raised an interesting point about the correct
usage of the genitive absolute in the sense of disregard (anaadara)
"in spite of, despite" according to the native grammars. Warder also
discusses this sense but he and others seem to think that the gen.
abs. can be used a little more liberally. I'm not sure. For what it's
worth, the following is my response to Teng Kee:

<< Warder does mention this usage (anaadaramhi ca. -- Sadd §633) on
p.58 as follows:

<< Often the genitive absolute has the special sense of disregarding:
"despite (the noun doing the participle)." >>

I think that strictly speaking in accordance with the native grammars
this may be the only usage allowed which can also be used in the
locative absolute. It seems possible to translate the sutta passage in
the 'anaadara' sense which would go like:

For, Rahula, in spite of you developing the development that is like
the earth; without (you) having fully grasped (your) mind, the
impressions that arise, agreeable or disagreeable, will persist.

But this may not fit in too well in the context of the rest of the
paragraph. >>

> J: I'm not too clear on a number of parts in the sentence. I find
> > 'develeping the development' awkward in English. Also, the

placement

> > of the 'na' before 'pariyaadaaya' instead of before '.thassanti'

seems

> > unusual to me.
> N: I think na is for both. I compared the Co:
> <citta.m na pariyaadaaya .thassantiiti ete phassaa uppajjitvaa
> As to the words, they do not overcome the mind and persist, this

means,

> after these impressions have arisen,
> tava citta.m antomu.t.thigata.m karonto viya
> while the mind just makes as it were a clenched fist >
> I compared with the Thai, and avoiding the awkward: having not

overcome..

> they do not persist, the Thai uses:they do not overcome the mind,

but here

> is not translated: and do not persist, .thassanti.
> And there is also this in the Co:
> pariyaadaaya gahetvaa .thaatu.m na sakkhissanti,

I'm inclined to think that the 'na' in the sutta passage is intended
for 'pariyaadaaya' only. I think if both were negated it would have
been written like 'apariyaadaaya na .thassanti'. Note that in the cty.
there is no 'na' preceding 'pariyaadaaya' as is the case in the sutta.
I have checked three versions of the same cty. passage and all are the
same in this respect. I'm not sure why this is so. One possibility
could be that the cty. is explaining in opposite terms for what would
occur if the citta were fully grasped.

> here we have gahetvaa and then at end: na sakkhissanti. I take the
> gahetvaa: after (the mind) has seized them... ??they do not remain.

In the

> subco: this adds :pariggahetvaa, as a gloss to gahetvaa:
> <gahetvaati kusalappavattiyaa okaasadaanavasena pariggahetvaa.
> As to the words, having taken hold of, because of the opportunity

given for

> a skilful life, after he has comprehended. >
> This is difficult for me. What is the gahetvaa, who is doing it.

It is difficult for me too. I'm not yet sure who or what is grasping
the mind. It seems that it would either have to be the impressions or
Rahula. It's certainly not at all clear.

> Earlier in the Co. it was stated; Rahula had to develop vipassana

pa~n~naa.

> The meaning is just as in the Elephant's Footprint Discourse, where

the

> monk, after he has learnt the elements, is not disturbed by painful

bodily

> impressions nor by harsh words.
> By the way if you have time, I stared so long on tava (in the Co.),

va is:

> just, only, indeed, but the ta: ta.m? Because indeed, or because

just?

'tava' (also 'tuyha.m') like 'te' is the genitive (or dative) singular
of 'tva.m', so 'tava citta.m' = your mind or thought.

Best wishes,

Jim