Hi Keren and group,

>
>
>I have difficulty to translate this passage:

So did I.B. Horner, so you are in illustrious company.

>sohaavuso, bhagavaa jaana.m jaanaati, passa.m pasasati.

Breaking up sandhis and correcting a little typo
gives: so hi aavuso bhagavaa jaana.m jaanaati
passa.m passati.

ñaa.namoli/bodhi translate: "For knowing, the
Blessed One knows; seeing, he sees."

Analysis of component parts gives:

-agent of sentence: nominative singular masculines: so bhagavaa jaana.m passa.m

-finite verbs: 3rd singular: jaanaati, passati

-adverbial: hi

-vocative: aavuso

Horner appears to have read jaana.m and passa.m
as accusative objects of the corresponding verbs
jaanaati, passati: knows the known, sees the
seen, or something similar. ñaa.namoli/bodhi on
the other hand read them as present participles
in the nominative singular, coordinated with the
subject of the sentence: knowing he knows, seeing
he sees.

To illustrate the latter the sentence could be
rewritten: so hi aavuso bhagavaa jaananto
jaanaati passanto passati.

The point seems to be to emphasize that he knows
and sees truly or he really knows and sees. It's
not just a personal opinion or point of view that
is at stake. The passage continues in this vein
with, cakkhubhuuto, ñaa.nabhuuto: he is vision,
he is knowledge.

Please let me know if I've missed something or if
this explanation is unclear. Mistakes are easy to
make.

best regards,

/Rett