Dear Nina,
thanks for the corrections.
I notice the online PTS PED is now "fully" Unicode searchable, which is why I did not pick up sakkaa.
e.g. when I enter 'sakka' in the search box, it will not list 'sakkÄ'; however, when I enter 'sakk', both 'sakka' and 'sakkÄ' are listed.
For the third point,
Akusala~nca hida.m, bhikkhave, ...
am I right to have,
hida.m = hi ida.m = (English) surely this.
Akusala~nca hida.m, bhikkhave, pahiina.m ahitaaya dukkhaaya sa.mvatteyya naaha.m eva.m vadeyya.m - 'akusala.m, bhikkhave, pajahathaa'ti.
And, surely (if) this abandoned unwholesome conduct, O monks, would lead to harm, to suffering, I would not say thus - 'O monks, abandon unwholesome conduct.'
Can I say that 'if', as given in the English sentence, is implied by the Optative Attanopada 1st person singular 'vadeyya.m' in the Pali?
metta,
Yong Peng.
--- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote:
> Sakkaa, bhikkhave, akusala.m pajahitu.m.
> possibilities / monks / unwholesome conduct / to abandon
> There are possibilities, O monks, to abandon unwholesome conduct.
>
> sakka (adj) possible.
N: comparing with PED: sakkaa: is an indeclinable, meaning: possible.
> No ceda.m, bhikkhave, sakkaa abhavissa akusala.m pajahitu.m,
> naaha.m eva.m vadeyya.m - 'akusala.m, bhikkhave, pajahathaa'ti.
> O monks, if there is now no possibility to abandon unwholesome
> conduct, I would not say thus - 'O monks, abandon unwholesome
> conduct.'
>
> ceda.m = ce ida.m.
> ce (enclitic) if.
N: ceda.m: I would translate ida.m as 'it', instead of 'now': If it would be impossible....
> Akusala~nca hida.m, bhikkhave, pahiina.m ahitaaya dukkhaaya
> sa.mvatteyya naaha.m eva.m vadeyya.m - 'akusala.m, bhikkhave,
> pajahathaa'ti.
> And (if) for now, O monks, abandoning unwholesome conduct would
> lead to harm, to suffering, I would not say thus - 'O monks,
> abandon unwholesome conduct.'
N: PTS has: If this abandoning of evil...
Instead of 'now', I think ida.m points to: akusala.m pahiina.m, akusala that is abandoned, or the abandoning of akusala.