Dear Jim

You wrote:

> As for finding the right meaning for 'tulyaadhikara.ne' in Sd 869, I
> think that will have to wait for another time and we'll just have to
> leave it at 'having the same substratum' for now. Although there are
> many commentaries on the same sutta in Kaccaayana, they all have their particular way of explaining the sutta and it would take a
> considereable amount of time to go over them all, corroborate, and
> uuderstamd as a harmonious whole. These comentaries range from the 7th > to the 20th century.

I would like to suggest a working principle to be used in the meantime. It is what is understood by this term in the Burmese tradition.

In the sentence "puriso bhatta.m pacati", "puriso" refers to a particular man so that man is the substratum of "puriso". The verb "pacati" refers to the action of that man, so he is also the substratum of "pacati". Then "puriso" and "pacati" have the same substratum.

On the contrary, in the sentence "purisena bhatta.m paciiyate", the verb "paciiyate" refers to the effects that rice undergoes while being cooked. So "paciiyate" has the same substratum as "bhatta.m" (rice), not "purisena" (man).

Then there is also another option possible. In the sentence "purisena gaama.m gacchiiyate", the verb "gacchiiyate" indicates the action in itself, so its substratum is neither that of "purisena" (man) nor that of "gaama.m" (village). Such sentences are called Absolute Voice ("bhaava") and rarely found in Pali texts.

with metta

Ven. Pandita