se.t.tho -- derivation 4

Derivation 4

Text: santehi sappurisehi icchiyati kantiyatiiti vaa se.t.tho.
santasaddopapado isu icchaakantiisu ta. -- Namakkaara.tiikaa, p.11
[kantiyati should probably be kaamiyati]

Translation: Or, "he is desired, he is loved by the wise ones", thus
se.t.tho. Having the secondary word 'santa', the root 'is' in the
sense of 'desire or love', the past participle affix 'ta'.

Comments:
1) 'santehi sappurisehi' is explained in my comments on the third
derivation.

2) On 'icchiyati kantiyati'. These two are passive verbs (kammuno
kiriyaapadaani). 'icchiyati' is derived from the root 'is' (isu
icchaaya.m Sd 989) which is optionally changed to 'iccha-' by Kc 522
(isuyamuunamanto ccho vaa), the 'ya' is the affix of impersonal and
passive verbs by Kc 440 (bhaavakammesu yo), the 'i' (or 'ii') is an
insertion (aagama) by Kc 442 (iva.n.naagamo vaa), 'ti' is the present
tense vibhatti affix, third person singular. I think 'kantiyati'
should probably be 'kaamiyati' from the root 'kam' (kamu
icchaa-kantisu Sd 1564). There can be a passive verb 'kantiyati'
derived from two different roots 'kant' having the meanings of 'to
cut' or 'to plait, twist, spin' none of which applies here.

3) On 'santasaddopapado' (having the secondary word 'santa'). The
word 'upapada' is a grammatical term and is defined in the CPD
as follows: upapada, n. [ts.], 1. (Grr.) a secondary, accessory,
subordinate word; esp. the first member of a two-member cpd.
<endquote> Except for the first derivative (from pasattha), the
remaining five are compounds (samaasas) consisting of two members.
There are four major categories of compounds: avyayiibhaava, dvanda,
tappurisa, and bahubbiihi with the kammadhaaraya and digu subtypes
included in the tappurisa. In this derivation, as in the last one, the
resolution of the compound 'se.t.tho' is 'santehi i.t.tho' (one
desired or loved by the wise). I think this would fit in the category
of a tatiyatappurisa compound with the upapada word 'santehi' in the
third (instrumental) case. It is hard for me to determine for sure
what type of compound the second derivative (su + e.t.tha) belongs to.
There is a type of kammadhaaraya called paadipubbapado (having 'pa'
etc. as the antecedent word) described at Sadd p.752-3. But from what
I'm reading, the meaning(s) of the prefix has to be in the same case
as the second member eg. "atireko adhiko vaa abhidhammo". In the case
of the prefix 'su' of 'se.t.tho' the case is different: 'sundare
(dhamme) e.t.tho' (one who seeks the beautiful) making it a
dutiyatappurisa or in another resolution: 'sundaraana.m (dhammaana.m)
+ e.t.tho' (seeker of the beautiful) making it a cha.t.thiitappurisa.
I still have a great deal more to learn about compounds before I can
accurately identify them. I just noticed that the 'sap' of 'sappurisa'
is definitely an upasagga (sa.m) at Sadd p.752.

4) On 'i.t.tha' (desired). This is a past participle formed in the
same way as the 'i.t.tha' (sought) of the third derivative. The
difference is that they are derived from different roots. One question
that came to mind was: Is the 'i.t.tha' that one finds in a word like
'i.t.thaaramma.na' from the root 'isu icchaaya.m' (to desire) or is it
from the root 'isa pariyesane' (to seek)? This question is considered
at Sv II 403 ad DN I 245: "i.t.thaa ti pariyi.t.thaa vaa hontu maa vaa
i.t.thaaramma.nabhuutaa ti attho." which still doesn't clarify the
matter for me but Dhammapaala's comment on this passage certainly
does: "gavesitampi i.t.than ti vuccati, ta.m idha naadhipetan ti aaha
'i.t.thaa ti pariyi.t.thaa vaa hontu maa vaa ti.
i.t.thaaramma.nabhuutaa ti sukhaaramma.nabhuutaa. -- Sv-p.t I 522. In
my earlier post on derivation 3, I was questioning how one could read
a past participle 'i.t.tho' as a future passive participle 'esitabbo'
in view of the fact that I haven't been able to fin a grammatical
sutta to support this, not even in Paa.nini. Well it just so happens
that the next word after 'i.t.thaa' that Buddhaghosa comments on is
another past participle: 'kantaa' (loved) which strangely enough is
interpreted as a future passive participle 'kaamaniyaa' which
Dhammapaala glosses with 'kaametabbaa'. Now why can't I find any of
this in the classical grammars?

Best wishes,
Jim