Re: se.t.tha.m -- derivation 2

Some additional notes for derivations 1 & 2:

1) Starting with my next posting on the derivations, I will use the
word 'se.t.tho' instead of 'se.t.tha.m' in the subject line as the
'se.t.tha.m' gives too much the impression that it's a neuter word
instead of the masculine word 'se.t.tho' we're studying.

2) Even though the approach may seem quite detailed and slow-paced, we
could very well cover a lot of Pali by the time we reach the end of
the second verse. I have introduced two more suttas below from
Kaccayana bringing the total to 6 and there is yet more to cover on
this word. It seems like a good idea to bring in as many suttas as
possible in our study so that we get many glimpses of the grammar
throughout in the early stages. The suttas are taken up briefly and
not fully dealt with which will happen later on when we arrive at them
in serial order. I should tell you that I'm not really all that
familiar with the grammars of Kaccayana, Aggavamsa, and hardly at all
of Moggallana. I may be more familiar with the Saddaniti but only as
an authoritative reference work since I've only studied bits of it
here and there. The suttas I bring in here are ones that I'm already
aware of or have been able to find and thought may be help in the
explanations. There is no attempt to be complete and errors and my own
misunderstandings about some of the suttas can happen. Since 6 suttas
have been brought in so far it seems possible that we could touch on
10% or more of the 675 Kaccayana suttas by the time we reach the end
of the verses.

3) In the explanation of the first derivation, I've messed it up by
not knowing how best to translate the word 'visesena' as none of the
dictionary meanings I've seen so far seem to fit.

sabbe ime paapaa, ayamimesa.m visesena paapo ti paapataro. -- from Kc
363
My earlier translation of this line is: "paapataro -- they are all
bad, of them this one by distinction is the worst." The 'worst' here
is a mistranslation of 'paapo' (bad). Originally, I had thought of
'visesena' as an adverbial 'in particular', 'particularly', or
'especially' until I saw the noun 'visese' in Kc 363. It still remains
a problem for me which may not be solved until I get around to an
in-depth analysis of the word. I find the adverbial use makes the most
sense: out of them all (who are bad) this one is particularly bad.

4) I noticed that in the second derivation, the commentator used
'ra.t.tha' as a substitute for 'ta' (tassa ra.t.tho) which doesn't
seem right to me. The 'r' is indicatory and dropped leaving 'a.t.tha'.
I can only find this affix in use for the root 'dis' as in
'da.t.thabba'. I've been questioning the validity of some of his
derivations which don't seem to conform to Kaccayana or Aggava.msa.
However, the derivations are interesting and worth investigating even
if it's only to test their validity. He also uses 'ta' uninflected
which I think should properly be written 'to' (nom. sing.).

5) The fifth rule I'd like to bring in concerns the elision of the
first vowel when two vowels come together (sa + e.t.tha > se.t.tha).
This rule along with Kc 14 applies to the first derivation as well (sa
+ i.t.tha > se.t.tha).

12. saraa sare lopa.m.
saraa kho sare pare lopa.m papponti.
  yassindriyaani samatha"ngataani; no heta.m bhante; sametaayasmaa
sa"nghena.

Translation:
12. Vowels before a vowel, elision.
Vowels obtain elision before a subsequent vowel.
yassindriyaani = yassa indriyaani; heta.m = hi eta.m; sametaayasmaa =
sametu aayasmaa.

6) The next rule concerns the function of the past participle affix
'ta' which also applies to the familiar 'buddha' which is derived from
budh + ta.

557. budhagamaaditthe kattari.
  budhagamuiccevamaadiihi dhaatuuhi tadatthe gamyamaane tapaccayo hoti
kattari sabbakaale.
  sabbe sa"nkhataasa"nkhate dhamme bujjhati abujjhi bujjhissatiiti
buddho, sara.na"ngato, samatha"ngato, amata"ngato, jaanaati ajaani
jaanissatiiti ~naato, iccevamaadi.

There are two words (tadatthe gamyamaane) I don't yet understand so I
really can't translate in full. The sutta tells me that words like
buddho and se.t.tho derived with the 'ta' affix are to be taken as
agent-nouns in the three times rather than just the past time as is
typical of past participles. A good illustration is in the line:

  sabbe sa"nkhataasa"nkhate dhamme bujjhati abujjhi bujjhissatiiti
buddho -- He understands, he has understood, he will understand all
conditioned and unconditioned dhammas.

So the interpretation of 'se.t.tho' could go like this: he seeks out,
he has sought out, and he will seek out beautiful dhammas in the
category of satipa.t.thaana and so on.

Best wishes,
Jim