SV: abhihat.thu.m

Dear Bh. Nyanatusita,

It is correct that abhiharati means to bring, to offer or the like. I was
extrapolating from recorded Sanskrit usage where
Abhiharati also means to carry off, cf. derivatives like abhihara/haara that
denotes the action of bringing near as well as that of taking away, robbing.
This I thought would make sense in this particular case: I thought that it
would make sense if the upaasaka invited the monk to bring (with him) i.e.
to take away the parikkhaaras he had brought him.  The difference depends
upon whether or not the agent of abhiha.tthu.m is the monk or the upaasaka.
I thought that if we assume that the agent is the monk, we can make sense
out of it without having to make assumptions about the infinitive being an
absolutive. Does this make sense?

Best wishes,
Ole


-----Oprindelig meddelelse-----
Fra: palistudy@yahoogroups.com [mailto:palistudy@yahoogroups.com] På vegne
af Nyanatusita
Sendt: 1. maj 2006 12:31
Til: palistudy@yahoogroups.com
Emne: Re: SV: [palistudy] abhihat.thu.m

Dear Ole,

Today I was looking again at the abhiha.t.thu.m pavaareyya construction and
the solution you suggested end March (see below).

I like your suggestion as it would make good sense. However, the only
problem is that the basic meaning of the verb abhiharati in this context,
and also other contexts, appears to be: ''brings toward'' or ''presents'',
not ''takes away''.

See the Suttavibhanga explanation to Paacittiya 35 in Vin IV 82:

Vin IV 82: “Pavaarito naama aasana.m pa~n~naayati, bhojana.m pa~n~naayati,
hatthapaase .thito abhiharati, pa.tikkhepo pa~n~naayati.”
: ''Invited: a seat is evident; food is evident; he presents standing within
arms-length ; the refusal is evident.''

What do you think about this?

Regards,
Bh. Nyanatusita


Ole Holten Pind wrote:
> Dear Nyanatusita,
>
> This is a very interesting problem. Andersen and Smith assumed that
> abhiha.t.thu.m is an absolutive. Their opinion was evidently
> influenced by the commentators who invariably, so it seems, gloss the
> term by means of an absolutive. Now the use of an absolutive
> immediately before a finite verb is, I believe, uncommon i Pali. The
> idea to interpret it as a .namul would in fact make much better sense.
> The only problem is the termination. A regular .namul, of which there
> are quite a few in the canon, and several in the Paatimokkha,
> sometimes unrecognised, should have a regular nominal ending in the
accusative, like, for instance, abhihaara.m.
> I have gone through the limited number of examples of the use of the
> term and I have come to the conclusion that it is a regular infinitive
> < Sanskrit abhihartum. One passage e.g. M I 222, describing an
> anavasesadohii, a monk who "milks" the pool of parikkhaaras that lay
> people present him with to such an extent that nothing is left over,
> explains that he knows no measure to taking matta.m na jaanaati
> patiggaha.naaya (the text is using a dative with the syntactical
> function of an infinitive). Abhiha.t.thu.m must refer to the action of
> taking of the monk: he is presented with parikkhaaras to take away
> (abhiha.t.thu.m). Whenever the old commentary included in the
> Vinaya-vibha.nga explains the phrase abhiha.t.thum pavaar- it says:
> take as much as you want. This becomes fully understandable if we
> assume that the phrase means: present(s) a monk (acc.) with bhesajja
> etc. (instr.) to take away (abhiha.t.thum) i.e. when he starts
> wandering after the rains residence. The monk is the agent of the
> action denoted by the infinitive. I think the problem originates in
identifying the agent of abhiha.t.thu.m as the lay people.
>
> With kind regards,
>
> Ole Pind
>
>
> Dear Ole Pind,
>
> Do you think that abhiha.t.thu.m, which only occurs with forms of the
> verb pavaareti, could be a .namul absolutive ending in -u.m, rather
> than an absolutive similar to da.t.thu.m (in which the absolutive
> ending -tu.m is used as an absolutive)?  If it is a .namul, then it is
> used adverbially, and this would make more sense in expressions such
> as abhiha.t.thu.m pavaareyya in the Paatimokkha.
>
> Best wishes,
>                              Nyanatusita
>
>
>
> 
>  





Yahoo! Groups Links