Re: AN2.1.1 Vajja Sutta (1/1)

Well first off I dont know if a rhetorical particle actually exists; I just made the term up. But I guess I just mean some kind of a particle that signifies that the sentence is a question that does not contain the word "what". For instance, "are you a buddhist?" or "are you going to the store?". However and added stipulation would be that the question is a retorical question which more often than not would contain a negative like "Are you not a buddhist". So maybe "ki.m" would not in this instance mean "what" but just be a particle that begs the question. Or maybe the "ki.m" phrase is a shortened idiomatic form of a common expression which in full could have ben rendered "what(ki.m) is their, therfore(ta.m), which(ya) I should have for believing that ..........

Ong Yong Peng <pali.smith@...> wrote: Dear Johnny,

can you explain what you mean by a "rhetorical particle"? Thank you.

metta,
Yong Peng.

--- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, johnny pruitt wrote:

Could we focus on the phrase "and what (is) that which I myself". Does
the word "ta.m" mean "therefore"? Possibly the the "ki.m" is just
used as a retorical particle indicating the desire to make someone
think about the following dialouge.

However I am stumped by the "ya"; could it be connected to the "ki.m"
somehow? This seems like an idiomatic phrase, therefore any coherency
we could make of it may be deceptive.

> My understanding of "Ki~nca ta.m yaaha.m ..." is "And is there
> any reason that I...".
>
> Therefore,
>
> And what (is) that which I myself would not be reborn in a state
> of woe...
>
> means
>
> And is there any reason that I myself would not be reborn in a state
> of woe...






---------------------------------
Don't be flakey. Get Yahoo! Mail for Mobile and
always stay connected to friends.

---------------------------------
Never miss an email again!
Yahoo! Toolbar alerts you the instant new Mail arrives. Check it out.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]