--- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, "Jim Anderson" <jimanderson_on@...>
wrote:

>
> Dear Florent (and Mahinda),
>
> Thank-you for sharing your teacher's explanation of this puzzling
> matter and for the Suddhodana quote from Sp V 1006 which I wasn't

aware

> of. I would like to pass on another possible solution, offered by

Ole

> Pind on my own list and supported by Lance Cousins, which is to
> take "vandite" as an accusative plural in association with "paade"

of

> the previous sentence. "...tumhaaka.m paade vandaami, aya.m me

vandanaa

> ti. ra~n~naa pana vandite. . ." --- " . . . I honour your

feet, 'this

> is my third salutation'. And (his feet) being honoured by the
> king, . . ."

Dear Jim,
I do not wish to split hairs, but this is perplexing. Even in terms
of this interpretation,it seems to me that we
cannot take paade ( the paade which you have put within
parenthesis) as an acc, pl. To get the sense "feet being honoured by
the king", we must assume that paade is in a locative absolute
construction, isn't it? But in that case, it should be "padesu
vanditesu", because otherwise it would mean that the king worshipped
only one foot. Are you thinking of an accusative absolute?

>The same usage of 'vandite' with 'paade' also occurs at D
> II 164.

What we have at D. ii 164 is "vandite ca pana aayasmataa mahaa-
kassapena ...sayam eva bhagavato citako pajjali" wich is similar
to "vandite pana ra~n~naa" in our passage. It means "when worshipped
by the venerable Mahaakassapa the Blessed One's pyre lighted of its
own accord. Here we have the locative absolute "vandite .. citake"
the latter word being again "understood". There is no 'paade' here.

Best wishes.
Mahinda