Re: Kc-va.n.n: intro. verse 1

Dear Ole,

Thanks for your response in agreement with my interpretation. There
are still 3 more verses to post. I'll be focussing primarily on
Kaccaayana's 2 introductory verses with the commentaries from the
Nyaasa, Suttaniddesa, and the Kaccaayana-va.n.nanaa. There are some
introductory material to work through in the commentaries first before
getting to the actual words of Kaccaayana (se.t.tha.m
tilokamahita.m...etc.).

With appreciation,
Jim

> avisuddhassa janassa suddhisampaapaka.m jina.m |
> mohassa dha.msaka.m dhamma.m natvaa sa"ngha.m nira"nga.na.m ||
>
> Having bowed to the Conqueror who causes unpurified people
>     to obtain purity;
> To the Dhamma, destroyer of confusion; to the spotless Sangha;
>
> 1) "-sampaapaka.m" (who causes to obtain/attain/reach): I take this
to
> be a causal agent-noun (hetukattusaadhana) derived from sa.m + pa +
> aap (dhaatu) + aka (suffix, Kc 641). I'm not sure if Pali grammar
> allows it, but it seems to me that "avisuddhassa janassa"
(unpurified
> people) and "suddhi-" (purity) are objects of "-sampaapaka.m" as if
> the latter functioned like the causative verb "sampaapeti" -- he
> causes x to obtain/attain y. According to Kc 309 and Sadd I p. 6,
the
> genitive "avisuddhassa janassa" can function as an accusative object
> of a causative verb but again I'm not sure if the same applies to a
> causal agent-noun.
>
> This is definitely the correct interpretation. Examples could be
cited from
> at.t.hakathaas and t.iikas. sampaapaka.m is as your explanation
presupposes
> di-valent and therefore constructed with two "accusatives" like
other
> nominals based upon the causative stem. Of course, Paa.ninian
grammar as
> well as Kaccaayana supports your analysis.
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Ole
>
> PS I am a bit slow because I have broken my left arm, and I have to
peck > like a chicken at the keyboard.


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com