On 2/27/08, Jim Anderson <jimanderson_on@...> wrote:

>
> Dear Nina and Mahipaliha,
>
> I think "ra~n~naa" should be "ra~n~ne" --- the missing subject
> of "vandite". This is the reading given in the online Thai Budsir
> edition on page 139.
>

I presume you understand that this ra~n~ne forms a loc. absol. with vandite?
The trouble then is it would mean "when the king was worshipped ". We cannot
forget that vand- is a transitive verb and vandite is the *passive* past
participle. It's like *chinne rukkhe: when the tree was cut down*. I can't
see how it can mean "when the king worshipped", which I believe is the sense
required by the context. (I do not have the resources right now to check
this up.) We must also ask, why have the other editions opted for ra~n~naa
in preference to ra~n~ne. Perhaps someone can look up the story and say what
is the sense natural to the context.
Mahipaliha



Best wishes,

> Jim
>
> --- In Pali@yahoogroups.com <Pali%40yahoogroups.com>, Nina van Gorkom
> <vangorko@...> wrote:
> >
> > Dear venerable Mahinda,
> > this is just one sentence but we all can learn from the way you
> > explained it so clearly.
> > I stared at it and thought: loc. vandite must be an absolute but
> > could not find the subject. But I have seen before that sometimes
> > these are omitted.
> > Marvellous, thank you.
> > Nina.
> > Op 27-feb-2008, om 1:33 heeft Mahinda Palihawadana het volgende
> > geschreven:
> >
> > > Ra~n~naa pana vandite bhagavanta.m avanditvaa .thaatu.m samattho
> > > naama ekasaakiyopi naahosi.
>
>
>

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