Dear Mahinda,

Thank you for your interpretation of 'mata.m' as a PPP which you also
suggested in message #13355, Feb. 24. The problem I have with it is
the need to insert "to be" (not found in the Pali) in order for the
PPP to function grammatically. I still think that taking 'mata.m' as
an action-noun in the neuter has some justification (it is possible to
have two or more valid interpretatons of the same Pali word like the
'suta.m' in 'eva.m me suta.m'. In Cone's entry for 'adhigama' some of
the other meanings given besides 'attainment' are 'understanding' and
'realisation' -- so I don't think it's incorrect to state that the
attainment of the truths is an understanding. Although Aggava.msa has
'saccaadhigamana.m' in v. 8a, I think the meaning can be taken as
exactly the same as the 'saccaadhigama-' in v. 7d.

Best wishes,
Jim

> > saccaadhigamana.m ta~nca, pa.tipattissita.m mata.m.
> > .
> >
> > and the attainment of the truths is an understanding based on
> > practice
> >
>
> Dear Jim,
> I would take mata.m as a PPP serving the function of a verb.

Grammatically

> "saccaadhigama.m .... mata.m (hoti)." The meaning would be "The

attainment

> of truths is known (or regarded or understood) to be based on

practice."

>
> Regards.
>
> Mahinda