Venerable Bhikkhu Yuttadhammo,
thank you very much for the detailed classification of kammadhaaraya.
I have to study it, it is not easy.
With respect,
Nina.
Op 23-sep-2007, om 4:41 heeft Noah Yuttadhammo het volgende geschreven:

> According to the texts we study, a kammadhaaraya samaasa consists
> of two
> pada that originally had the same vibhatti (declension) and vacana
> (number), and are either a) one visesana (qualifier) and one padhaana
> (chief, ie noun), or b) two visesana taking an external pada as the
> padhaana.
>
> It is divided into six types:
>
> 1. visesanapubbapada
>
> mahanto puriso = mahaapuriso - a great man
>
> 2. visesanuttarapada
>
> satto viseso = sattaviseso - a special being
>
> 3. visesanobhayapada
>
> khan~njo ca kujjo ca = kha~njakujjo - lame and humpbacked
>
> 4. visesanopamaapada
>
> kaako viya suuro = kaakasuuro (upamaapubbapada) - a person who is bold
> like a crow
> naro siiho viya = narasiiho (upamaanuttarapada) - a man who is like
> a lion
>
> 5. sambhaavanapubbapada
>
> sama.no (aha.m) iti pa.ti~n~naa = sama.napa.ti~n~naa - a
> declaration of
> being a samana
>
> 6. avadhaara.napubbapada
>
> buddho eva ratana.m = buddharatana.m - a jewel that is the Lord Buddha
>
> > siiho viya muni = munisiiho (lionlike sage)
> > naago viya Buddho = Buddhanaago (the elephant-like or noble Buddha)
> Just a note, that since these are upamaanuttarapada, I think they
> should
> technically be analyzed thus:
>
> muni siiho viya = munisiiho
> Buddho naago viya = Buddhanaago
>
> Each of the six types has a different formation, as you can see. What
> they have in common is that they are originally the same vibhatti and
> vacana (unlike tappurisa and bahubbihi). Digu is considered a
> kammadhaaraya of sorts, I think.
>
> "na" pubbapada is not always considered kammadhaaraya - some say it is
> an "ubhaya tappurisa", whatever that means :)

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