Hi Dmytro,

Thank you for this. I've printed it out, taped it into my copy of the PED, and pencilled in the necessary corrections at the entries for the two words.

best regards,

/Rett

>Hello Pali friends,
>
>I am researching the meaning of verb 'ceteti'.
>
>To explore the semantic field I found such words used along this verb:
>
>So na ceva ceteti, na ca abhisa"nkharoti. - Potthapada sutta, DN 1.184
>
>YaÒca, bhikkhave, ceteti yaÒca pakappeti yaÒca anuseti... -
>Cetanaa sutta, SN 2.65
>
>na ceteti na pattheti na ca sa"nkappeti. - Petakopadesa .220
>
>We see that the words associated mean intention, planning and wish.
>
>In commentaries the verb is strongly linked with the noun 'cetana' -
>"will", "intention":
>
>ya~nca, bhikkhave, cetetiiti ya.m cetana.m ceteti, pavattetiiti
>attho. - Nidanavagga-Atthakatha 2.70
>
>vedanaa vedeti, cetanaa ceteti, sa~n~naa sa~njaanaatiiti attho. -
>Salayatanavagga-Atthakatha, 2.380
>
>So the verb 'ceteti' means 'wills, intends', and the identification of
>'ceteti' with 'cinteti' by Prof. Rhys-Davids in PED is evidently a
>mistake.
>
>'Cinteti' has a markedly distinct place in the semantic field, -
>"thinks over, ponders about":
>
>Cinteti aaramma.na.m upanijjhaayatiiti citta.m - Sagathavagga-Tika Mya. 1.93
>
>Jhaayatiiti cinteti. - Atthakanipatadi-Atthakatha, 5.79
>
>hita.m ajjheti cinteti sajjhaaya.m karotiiti - Apadana-Atthakatha .430
>
>and is linked with the noun 'citta':
>
>Tena phassena ta.m phassa.m phusati, taaya vedanaaya ta.m vedana.m
>vedeti, taaya sa~n~naaya ta.m sa~n~na.m sa~njaanaati, taaya cetanaaya
>ta.m cetana.m ceteti, tena cittena ta.m citta.m cinteti, tena
>vitakkena ta.m vitakka.m vitakketi, tena vicaarena ta.m vicaara.m
>vicaareti, taaya piitiyaa ta.m piiti.m piyaayati, taaya satiyaa
> ta.m sati.m sarati, taaya pa~n~naaya ta.m pa~n~na.m pajaanaati, -
>Katthavatthu .314
>
>Saratiiti ta.m ovaadaanusaasanidhamma.m cinteti citte karoti.
>
>It seems that the source of confusion has been in the phrase:
>
>Cetetiiti cinteti. - Duka-tika-catukkanipata-Atthakatha 2.256
>
>which was taken too literally without more extensive study.
>
>Best wishes, Dmytro