On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 10:24 AM, Jim Anderson <jimanderson.on@...>wrote:

>
>
> I'm having a problem with introductory verse 9. Trying to decide on
> whether the subject of "viditvaa" is "vi~n~nuu" (I'm leaning towards
> this one) in paada d of verse 10 or "pariyattaabhiyuttaana.m" (gen.
> pl.) on the same line as "viditva". I think "saddalakkha.na.m" should
> probably be construed like "saddasattha" or "vyaakaara.na", i.e., a
> system of grammar.
>


>
> Dear Jim,
>
> I would connect verses 9 and 10 with verse 13 and translate as follows.
>
>
>
> Pariyattābhiyuttānaṃ, viditvā saddalakkhaṇaṃ;
>
> Yasmā na hoti sammoho, akkharesu padesu ca. (09)
>
> Yasmā cāmohabhāvena, akkharesu padesu ca;
>
> Pāḷiyatthaṃ vijānanti, viññū sugatasāsane. (10)
>
> Tasmā (tadatthikā suddhaṃ, nayaṃ nissāya viññunaṃ;)
>
> Bhaññamānaṃ mayā *sadda-nītiṃ* gaṇhantu sādhukaṃ. (13)
>
> Wherefore, on understanding grammar, confusion regarding letters and words
> does not occur to those who are engaged in the study of scripture;
>
> Wherefore, due to (that) freedom from confusion, wise persons in the Buddha
> Saasana, understand (correctly) the meaning of texts;
>
> Therefore, grasp (well) the Saddaniiti ……. that is being proclaimed by me.
>
> On sa.mmoho na hoti in stz 9, cp. the very common usage “etadahosi : it
> occurred”.
>
>
>
> Rough translation. It has of course to be fine-tuned.
>
> Mahinda
>
>
>

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