Dear Nina,

thanks again. About 'siilaa', yes, it is the alternate declension for
neuter nominative plural.

If we look at "vajjabhiiruno bhavissaama", the noun and verb do not
agree. 'vajjabhiiruno' is (dative) singular, but 'bhavissaama' is
(first person) plural. This makes me wonder if 'vajjabhiiruno' is an
infrequent plural form. What do you think?

metta,
Yong Peng.

--- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote:

> Y.P.: Thanks for pointing out the "vajjabhayadassaavino" is in
> the dative. This way, it agrees with "vajjabhiiruno" in number
> (singular) and case (dative). However, the commentary seems to
> treat both words as plural nominative:
>
> * vajjabhiirunoti vajjabhiirukaa.
> * vajjabhayadassaavinoti vajjaani bhayato dassanasiilaa.

I repeat the text:

Tasmaatiha, bhikkhave, eva.m sikkhitabba.m 'di.t.thadhammikassa
vajjassa bhaayissaama, samparaayikassa vajjassa bhaayissaama,
vajjabhiiruno bhavissaama vajjabhayadassaavino'ti. Eva~nhi vo,
bhikkhave, sikkhitabba.m. Vajjabhiiruno, bhikkhave,
vajjabhayadassaavino eta.m paa.tika`nkha.m ya.m parimuccissati
sabbavajjehii"ti.

The Co: vajjabhiirunoti vajjabhiirukaa.
* vajjabhayadassaavinoti vajjaani bhayato dassanasiilaa.

I think the Co. does not point out the grammar here, but rather the
meaning of siilaa, ways of practice, explained as vajjabhiirukaa,
dassanasiilaa. How else would we explain the ending in bhiirukaa?
Only, siila is neuter, so it should be silani. Or is it a variant? The
Co. elaborates on the noble Persons who attain the four stages of
enlightenment and will be free from all wrongs. Dassana can mean:
seeing by insight. Siila includes many degrees of practice as is also
pointed out by the Co. to this text.

To return to the grammar of the sutta text: I think it can be dative
singular.