Re: memorizing

Dear Nina (and Dan),

> Dear Jim,
> I looked up in Warder Ch 17, tad and ta.m, a particle: that, then, so. It
is
> illative, but what is that? Thus, as you say, ida.m goes with sacca.m.
ta.m
> is just a particle at the beginning.

I don't know the meaning of 'illative'. I had been thinking that 'ta.m'
might be a particle and 'then' was what came to mind. I recalled
a 'ta.m kho pana' in the first paragraph of the Vinayapi.taka but according
to its commentary it is a pronoun that goes with 'bhavanta.m gotama.m'. I
have pasted the relevant passages at the bottom for your information (no
need to give a translation). I couldn't find any commentary on 'ta.m kho
panida.m' so I thought these passage might help.

> Translation could start: Then indeed this ariyan truth...
> I am not sure the ii of gaminii is in this case: usually or habitually
> leading to.

I see 'dukkhanirodhagaaminii' as an adj. ending in a nom. sing. fem. affix
and it goes with 'pa.tipadaa'. All the words in 'ida.m dukkhanirodhagaaminii
pa.tipadaa ariyasacca.m bhaavetabba.m' are in the nom. sing.. So I think the
relation of 'dukkha... pa.tipadaa' to 'ida.m ariyasacca.m' is one of
apposition like 'so and so, the minister'. Hence, 'this ariyan truth, [which
is] the way leading to the cessation of suffering, is to be developed'.
gaaminii is the fem. version of gaamii (stem: gaamin). I'm doubtful that
'usually or habitually' (tassiila) is the right interpretation although it's
the right one for 'jhaayii' (habitual meditator). I have found the following
sutta in the Saddaniiti that might be applicable:

1294. aniyatakaale [at an indefinite time??] gamaadito .nii.
catumaggasa.mkhaata.m sambodha.m gacchatii ti sambodhagaamii - dhammo, . . .

However, more checking is needed.

> At the end there is the <me> untranslated: by me? Strange that it comes
> after the quote.
> Nina.

The passage given is only part of the whole sentence as follows:

"ta.m kho panida.m dukkhanirodhagaaminii pa.tipadaa ariyasacca.m
bhaavetabbanti me, bhikkhave, pubbe ananussutesu dhammesu cakkhu.m
udapaadi, ~naa.na.m udapaadi, pa~n~naa udapaadi, vijjaa udapaadi,
aaloko udapaadi."

Yes, I've been wondering why "me" comes right after bhavetabbanti. I had
thought that "me" could be in the instrumental case (= by me) going with
"ananussutesu" (not heard) but in the Tathaagatasutta (SN 56.12)
"tathaagataana.m" (gen. or dat. pl.) is used in the place of "me" in a
similar passage. ~Naa.namoli has "that arose in me" (like a locative). The
sentence is turning out to be a difficult one for me to figure out. The use
of 'ta.m' is uncertain and if it is a pronoun what does it refer to? (See
the passages below) It's hard to work out how all the parts fit together
syntactically.

Best wishes,
Jim

=================
Ta.m kho pana bhavanta.m gotama.m eva.m kalyaa.no kittisaddo abbhuggato-
'itipi so bhagavaaaraha.m sammaasambuddho vijjaacara.nasampanno sugato . . .
Vin
III 1

  Ta.m kho panaati itthambhuutaakhyaanatthe upayogavacana.m, tassa kho pana
bhoto gotamassaati attho. Sp 1.111

  Ittha.m ima.m pakaara.m bhuuto pattoti itthambhuuto, tassa aakhyaana.m
itthambhuutaakhyaana.m, soyevattho itthambhuutaakhyaanattho. Atha vaa
ittha.m eva.mpakaaro bhuuto jaatoti itthambhuuto, taadisoti aakhyaana.m
itthambhuutaakhyaana.m, tadevattho itthambhuutaakhyaanattho, tasmi.m
upayogavacananti attho. Abbhuggatoti ettha hi abhisaddo padhaanavasena
itthambhuutaakhyaanatthajotako kammappavacaniiyo abhibhavitvaa
uggamanakiriyaapakaarassa diipanato, tena payogato "ta.m kho pana
bhagavantan"ti ida.m upayogavacana.m saami-atthe samaanampi appadhaanavasena
itthambhuutaakhyaanatthadiipanato "itthambhuutaakhyaanatthe"ti vutta.m.
Tenevaaha "tassa kho pana bhagavatoti attho"ti.
Siilakkhandhavaggo-abhinava.tiikaa 2.18


_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com