Re: Vin. Mv. 1:6 (...continued)

Dear Dan,

> Dear Jim and Nina,
> Wonderful help! Thanks.
>
> Comments interspersed (new comments indicated by --> Dan:
>
> D: Regarding the 4th noble truth: "ta.m kho panida.m
> > dukkhanirodhagaaminii pa.tipadaa ariyasacca.m bhaavetabbanti me"
> > [Vin. Mv. 1:6, S 56:11, and Ps XVI.]
>
> D: 1. What's panida.m?
>
> J: pana ida.m. 'pana' is a particle while 'ida.m' is the nom. sing.
> neuter
> form of the pronoun 'ima' (stem form). The final 'a' of 'pana' has
> been
> elided before a following vowel. The combination could also be
> written as:
> pan' ida.m. The 'ida.m' (this) goes with 'ariyasacca.m' (noble truth).
>
> N: pana ida.m, watch those sandhis. Pana can be translated as and
> now, on
> the contrary (adversative).
>
> --> Dan: So, a word ending in short 'a' followed by a word beginning
> in 'i' is contracted by squeezing the words together and dropping the
> i? Do I have that rule right?

Jim: The 'a' is dropped not the 'i'. The rule is a general one and can apply
to combinations of many of the vowels but there are exceptions for which
special rules apply eg. na + ime > nayime; a + a > aa, cakkhu + indriya >
cakkhundriya, etc. The general rule is stated as: vowels before a vowel are
elided (30. saraa lopa.m papponti sare. Saddaniiti, p.611). My translation
of the rule is probably inaccurate. I don't have my PTSD with me and so
couldn't look up "papponti" which might be found under "paapu.naati".

A note on the Saddaniiti: This work is mentioned in Warder's bibliography at
the back of his Introduction to Pali. The first two volumes are available on
the CSCD but the third volume (Suttamaala) is the one where all the rules
dealing with sandhi, word formation, syntax, etc. are found. In the early
80s I procured with some difficulty a copy of H. Smith's romanized edition
in six volumes and to me it is the most comprehensive and authoritatve Pali
grammar available (recently reprinted by the PTS). The beginner might find
the work quite incomprehensible without some understanding of the
traditional Indian system of language description. To understand the system
I studied Panini's A.s.taadhyaayii (for Sanskrit) which is available in an
English translation with copious notes (S.C. Vasu's ed.). I have found
comparing Pali with Sanskrit to be quite helpful in clarifying the many
ambiguities of Pali.

> The ambience of "and now" is quite different from that of "on the
> contrary," but it is interesting that both are glosses for "pana". It
> seems to give a special emphasis to what follows: "'And now', listen
> to this. Be careful, though. Although it may only appear to be subtly
> different from what I said before in the previous sentence, it is
> really quite different ('on the contrary')." Does that make sense? I
> really need to get this right...

Jim: Yes, there is quite a big difference. The two meanings among others are
found in Buddhadatta's dictionary as follows:

" pana (Adversative and interogative particle) ind. and; yet; but; on the
contrary; and now; more over." (internet version)

I'm still not clear on the meaning of "ta.m kho pana". One possibility
might be "then indeed moreover". I notice that ~Naa.namoli and BB have left
the phrase untranslated. To learn more about "pana" one might have to go
beyond the Pali-English dictionaries and look for definitions with examples
in commentaries and grammatical treatises to get a better idea. From the
meanings given by Buddhadatta above one has to decide which ones to rule
out. I think 'yet', 'but; on the contrary' don't fit the context. You should
find more details in the PTSD.

> D: 2. Also, "dukkhanirodhagaaminii"...
>
> J: The translation that I made using "by developing" was not one I
> agreed
> with. I was only rewording ~Nm's in order to make it more
> intelligible. I
> think his "maintaining" might have something to do with "anurakkhanaa"
> as found in the last of the 4 right efforts (sammappadhaana-
> s). "pa.tipadaa"
> (the way) would be the accusative object of "developing" just like
> "maintaining" but "pa.tipadaa" happens to be in the nom. sing. fem.
> "dukkhanirodhagaaminii" translates into "leading to (gaaminii) the
> cessation
> (nirodha) of suffering (dukkha).
>
> --> Dan: Hmmmm... I can see that. I'm a little skeptical of mixing
> the teachings in translations, though, because the teaching often
> seems to take similar ideas and expresses them in different ways or
> emphasizes different aspects, apparently tailored to meet the needs
> of the listener at that time. For example, paticca samuppada, the
> five aggregates, and the elements and bases in a lot of ways seem to
> be just different formulations for the same general phenomena. I find
> that mixing the metaphors is dangerous. Better to understand each as
> it is? I think so. The words mean somewhat different things in the
> different contexts.

I'm puzzled by what you say here as I don't see where there has been a
mixing of the teachings or metaphors in the translation under discussion. My
disagreement is over ~Naa.namoli's translation of "bhaavetabba.m" because he
is reading into it meanings that aren't really there. Although the
penetration of the truths is found in the teachings it is best considered in
texts that contain such words as pa.tivedha, pa.tivijjhati, etc. along with
sacca. It's much better to study the teachings in Pali as so much can get
lost or distorted in the translation.

> "bhaavetabbanti" is made up of two words: bhaavetabba.m + iti and
> according
> to the rules of sandhi (euphonic combination), .m + iti becomes nti.
>
> --> Dan (interrupting): O.K. This is a difficulty I don't have much
> experience with. "-anti" sure looks like 1st conjugation, 3rd person
> pl. indicative, but in this case it isn't. For me to unravel
> something like this at this stage, I notice that there is a quote,
> look for a '-ti' or an '-iti' (possibly sandhi-ized) to mark the end.

Endings and even words that look the same are fairly common in Pali. The
'ti' and 'iti' are the same word but in modern dictionaries and glossaries
they will probably be listed as separate words. The 'ti' has elision of the
first 'i'. Both are used to show the end of an expression but 'iti' (thus)
has other uses besides as in: itipi so bhagavaa... One will also have to
understand how a quote fits in syntactically with the rest of the sentence
and know where the quote actually begins which is not always obvious.
Sometimes iti before a vowel becomes: icc. There are several special sandhi
rules that deal with 'iti'.

> N: bhaavati: to become, bhaaveti: causative, make become or develop.
> the
> postfix abba denotes: should be or must be done.

Jim: That should be 'tabba' not 'abba'.

> --> Dan: Very nice! But I can see that Pali is a challenging
> language... A lot of similar-looking endings with different meanings
> and a vowel fluidity that morphs words into strange looking beasts.
>
> D: 3. "pa.tipadaa" -- why the long "a" at the end? PTS dictionary (on-
> line) only gives "pa.tipada". Surely it's not nominative plural.
>
> J: The online PED isn't showing the proper diacritics if all you saw
> was
> "pa.tipada". The hardcopy would show "pa.tipadaa" (fem.).
>
> --> Dan: The hard copy is in the mail. Should be here shortly.

I think you'll find it useful. My copy shows the obvious signs of being much
in use and is still usable after 25 years. It may take awhile to get used to
the different order of letters.

> D: 4. "ariyasacca.m" must be accusative, object of bhaavetabbbanti.
>
> J: It wouldn't have the accusative case ending (although the nom. and
> acc.
> endings happen to look the same). Here, the object or patient is
> expressed
> in the nominative case just as the agent would be expresed in the
> instrumental case.
>
> --> Dan (interrupting again): O.K. I haven't learned instrumental yet
> (and there's not one here, right?), but with bhaavetabbba.m as
> passive voice I can see the nominative.

Jim: There is no instrumental word in the quote itself but I think one can
be understood: is to be developed (by me). It is possible for the 'me' that
follows the '-ti' to be interpreted as an instrumental going with
'ananussutesu dhammesu' -- among dhammas not heard (before) by me. But as I
pointed in my note to Nina it might be in the gen. or dat. sing. One of the
nice things about the passive voice is the shift of emphasis away from the
agent and on to the object. It wouldn't sound as nice if it were: I
should/must develop this noble truth... Past passive participles are also
very numerous in Pali.

Jim

P.S. I think some of your questions about the Vism. passage on dsg (eg. on
taru.navipassanaa) are answered in the Mahaa.tiikaa.



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