Dear Nina,

Thank you, I have a question. Do you think that the Lord Buddha used
such sandhi variations to intentionally challenge the meager minds of
his students? :)

a"nga.m+t+vaa+eva - Is this correct?

Yuttadhammo

----- Original Message -----
From: "Nina van Gorkom" <vangorko@...>
To: <Pali@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, April 04, 2005 3:50 PM
Subject: Re: [Pali] AN 6.01.05,7


>
> Venerable Bhante Yuttadhammo,
> Thank you very much.
> A good reminder to face the sights, sounds, etc. with understanding.
> We
> cannot escape them yet, and they are not always so pleasant.
> sa"nkha.m gacchati. This does not have to do with a trumpet.
> English: is
> reckoned. See PED under sankhaa or sankhyaa: enumeration,
> definition.
> Sankha.m gacchati, to be styled, called defined.
> I met the term before: sa"nkhaata: so called. (PED does not use "n).
> op 04-04-2005 02:18 schreef Ven. Yuttadhammo op
> buffer@...:
>> Here is AN 6.01.05,6 and 7
>>
> Bh: Comments:
>
>> ra~n~no a"ngantveva sa"nkha.m gacchati. I don't understand
>> a"ngantveva, but I am guessing the sandhi to be: a"ngantu +eva,
>> which
>> I am here pretending to be a"ngant (one possessing factors) + eva
>> (verily). Or maybe it is a gerund - a"ngantvaa eva? ka"nkhaa me
>> hoti...
> N: PTS has: is reckoned a rajah's portion. So, I take it to be just
> the
> substantive a"nga, limb, factor. the niggahita makes: n, and vaa
> is: or. We
> have a 't' in between. Or is reckoned indeed as a rajah's factor.
> But I stand to be corrected with this sandhi.
> With respect,
> Nina.
>
>
>
> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups
>
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> [Homepage] http://www.tipitaka.net
> [Send Message] pali@yahoogroups.com
> Paaliga.na - a community for Pali students
> Yahoo! Groups members can set their delivery options to daily digest
> or web only.
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>