op 28-05-2001 02:52 schreef Jim Anderson op jimanderson_on@...:
> Dear Nina,
>
> Thank-you for your response and all your comments. I have looked over your
> translation below and have inserted my corrections, comments, and some
> translations (for you to compare with). I hope you will find them helpful
> and of interest. Please ask for further clarification if desired.
Dear Jim,
I am most grateful for your corrections and I find them very helpful and
interesting. I like it to learn Pali in this way, it is very enjoyable.
Thank you very much.
>
>> The following excerpts are taken from the Samyuttanikaya commentary and
>> subcommentary on the passage you're interested in. That's all there is --
>> explanations of the words 'ubhatobhaagavimutta' and 'pa~n~naavimutta'.
>>
>> ubhato-bhaaga-vimuttaa ti dviihi bhaagehi vimuttaa.
>> aruupaavacara-samaapattiyaa ruupa-kaayato vimuttaa, agga-maggena
>> naama-kaayato ti. pa~n~naa-vimuttaa ti pa~n~naaya vimuttaa
>> tevijjaadibhaava.m appattaa khi.naasavaa. -- PTS SA i 278 (a.t.thakathaa)
>>
>> [subcommentary:]
>> ubhatobhaagavimuttaati ubhayabhaagehi ubhayabhaagato vimuttaati.
>> ayamettha atthoti dasseti "dviihi bhaagehi vimuttaa, aruupaa ...pe...
>> naamakaayato"ti iminaa. tevijjaadibhaavanti
>> tevijjacha.labhi~n~nacatuppa.tisambhidabhaava.m.
>> pa~n~naavimuttaa hi ta.m tividha.m appattaa kevala.m pa~n~naaya
>> eva vimuttaa. -- Myanmar SA.T 1.291 (.tiikaa)
>
>> ubhato-bhaaga-vimuttaa ti dviihi bhaagehi vimuttaa.
>
> NVG: freed in both ways: being freed in the two parts (bhaago).
>
> JA: For 'dviihi bhaagehi vimuttaa' I'm inclined to translate this as '<are>
> freed from two parts'. The past participles (eg. vimutta) are mostly in
> the past tense but your 'being freed' is in the present tense.
You are quite right, I should pay more attention to the plural form and the
whole grammar. While reading texts now Iam inspired to look up things more
often in Warder. I think too that instead of being freed just <are> freed
may be better, since it happened at the attainment of arahatship.
JA: 'in both ways' is a common translation for
> 'ubhatobhaaga' but one also finds 'in both ways' for just the 'ubhato' part
> alone which leaves 'bhaaga' untranslated. 'ubhato' consists of the
> pronoun 'ubha' (both) and the affix 'to' which make it an indeclinable
> (nipaata) in the senses belonging to the fifth or seventh case, singular or
> plural. The syntactical relation of 'ubhato' to 'bhaaga' is unclear to me
> but according to the interpretation 'dviihi bhaagehi' it's as though only
> the pronominal adj. 'ubha' it being read without the meaning of the
> indeclinable affix 'to'. Edgerton in his BHSD has 'emancipated from both
> parts' for his ubhayatobhaagavimukta entry.
N: the suffix < to> may sugges t< from both>,abl. , thus here may be not an
adverb? I wonder whether suffix <to> also refers to <bhaaga>? What is BHSD ?
>
> I wonder if the terms: tevijjaa, cha.labhi~n~naa, ubhatobhaagavimuttaa, and
> pa~n~naavimuttaa in the sutta (S i 191) are all functioning as nouns
> (individuals) or as adjectives or could they be either. The
> Puggalapa~n~natti treats these terms as nouns.
>
>> aruupaavacara-samaapattiyaa ruupa-kaayato vimuttaa, agga-maggena
>> naama-kaayato ti.
>
> NVG: he is freed from the material body by the attainment of aaruupaavacara
> (aruupajhaana), and freed from the mental body by the highest path
> (aggamagga).
>
> JA: 'he is freed' is in the wrong number for the plural 'vimuttaa'.
> A 'vimutto' would call for the singular. I would perhaps replace 'he is'
> with 'are' to indicate a plural. Notice your use of 'from' instead of 'in'
> as in your previous sentence. The two parts (bhaaga-s) refer to 'ruupakaaya'
> and 'naamakaaya'.
>
>> pa~n~naa-vimuttaa ti pa~n~naaya vimuttaa tevijjaadibhaava.m
>> appattaa khii.naasavaa.
>
> NVG: freed by pa~n~naa: he is freed by pa~n~naa: he has destroyed the
> aasavaas without having attained the threefold knowledge etc.
>
> JA: Again, 'he is' & 'he has' should both be in the plural. You didn't
> translate '-bhaava.m'. Perhaps: 'without having attained the state of
> <possessing> the three knowledges, etc.'
N: bhaava.m : I found it difficult to translate: condition, nature, but
state seems good.
>
> Now the subco:
>
>> ubhatobhaagavimuttaa ti ubhayabhaagehi ubhayabhaagato vimuttaa ti.
>
> NVG: freed in both ways: he is freed in both parts, by both parts.
>
> JA: the subcommentary reads the fifth case plural for -bhaagehi
> and -bhaagato. This is a good example of how some Pali phrases taken
> together do not translate well into English. A literal translation would be:
> 'from both parts freed: from both parts, from both parts freed' which
> doesn't make much sense until one reads it in Pali.
N: I did not know what to choose: in or by both parts.
I read in Ven. (p. 66) : < The commentaries explain the name <<liberated in
both ways>> as meaning <<through the immaterial attainment he is liberated
from the material body and through the path (arahatship) he is liberated
from the mental body" (MA.ii, 131)>
He then quotes the sutta (M i, 477). I think that liberated from the
naamakaaya means: liberated from all defilements, and thus from rebirth.
Naamakaaya may refer to citta and cetasikas, but in some texts it refers to
the cetasikas. In the <Netti> it refers to citta and cetasikas,as I read in
some passage.
It would be interesting if Amara or Kom could ask Acharn Somporn about this,
or Khun Santi.A difficult subject.
Just now I found a clue in the >Netti>(Enlg p. 65, Pali p. 41): <Herein, the
naamakaaya is the footing for ignorance, the ruupakaaya is the footing for
craving. Why is that? In the kinds of existence having ruupa there is
cleaving to them, and in the formless kinds of existence there is confusion
(about them).>
Ve, Bodhi ((Mahaanidaana sutta, p.41) states:< The commentaries explain the
word ubhatobhaagavimutta as meaning both liberated through two portions and
liberated from two portions. >
>
>> ayamettha attho ti dasseti "dviihi bhaagehi vimuttaa, aruupaa ...pe...
>> naamakaayato"ti iminaa.
>
> NVG: This here (ayamettha) is the meaning. He shows by this (iminaa) : <
> freed by two ways, aruupa...etc. ...he is freed from the mental body >.
>
> JA: I take 'ayamettha attho' to be the patient of 'dasseti' ie: He shows:
> 'this here is the meaning' with this: '<are> freed from the two parts,
> aruupa . . . <are freed> from the mental body.' Or simply put: he shows x by
> means of y.
>
N: Yes, you are right: ayamettha attho ti is the patient of dasseti.
>> tevijjaadibhaavan ti tevijjacha.labhi~n~nacatuppa.tisambhidabhaava.m.
>
> NVG: The threefold knowledge and others (aadi) are existing, the threefold
> knowledge, the six abhi~n~naa, the four discriminations (pa.tisambhidas).
>
> JA: The state of <possessing> the three knowledges, etc: the state of
> <possessing> the three knowledges, the six superknowledges, or the four
> discriminations.
> N: Yes, again bhaava.m: you are right: the state...
Do you have to type out all these texts or do you copy them even with the
Email accents? I ask this with a view on future texts, I do not want to take
up too much of your time. Thank you very much again, Nina.