> From time to time, I have come across the niggahita in
> sammaa-sa(.m)buddhassa. I wonder if someone could comment on
> this. Is it simply an artifact of sam+budh? Does it change the
> meaning in a subtle way?

Dear Alex,

I think this goes back to what Duroiselle has to say on
page 15 of his Pali Grammar, as I wrote in my post on Apr. 9:

"42. When precedeng a vowel, niggahita becomes m:
(i) ta.m+attha.m=tamattha.m
(ii) ya.m+aahu=yam aahu
(iii) ki.m+eta.m=kim eta.m"

Then there is a note:

"Rules 39 and 42 are not strictly adhered to in texts edited in Roman
characters; in prose above all, niggahita is allowed to remain
unchanged before a vowel or a consonant, even in the middle of a word
sometimes; in poetry, the retention of niggahita or its change to m
before a vowel, is regulated by the exigencies of the metres."

I assume that sa.mbuddha is not sam+budh, but sa.m + budh (see PED
p.693). sam* is not listed in the PED as a prefix.

Suma"ngalaani,

Yuttadhammo