Re: okaasa (...further)

Good!  We are in complete agreement: the usage of "okaasa" is rather
odd, and there is no apparent explanation for it!

> ... unless we assume that it is a
> backformation from Sanskrit avakaa.sa...

That would certainly be more in the spirit of Kacc. verse 1-1-9,
however, we would then have to come up with a fairly convoluted
explanation of how the semantics of the rules themselves might have
changed over time ... I would tend instead to simply leave "okaasa" on
the list of features in Kacc. that seem "Wierd and ancient" to me.

I do not mean to suggest that everything "wierd" must necessarily be
"ancient".  To contrast another example, Dr. Pind's article points out
that the issue of the retroflex ".l" could indicate that Kacc. was
written at a geographically removed place (rather than an historically
removed date).  It could be that other oddities just reflect the
peculiarities of Pali in the particular isolated valley (in the
Himalayas?) where it was composed.

As with "okaasa" and many other oddities, I do not take the retroflex
".l" as ready proof for any pre-conceived theory ... it simply adds to
my list of "the wierd and the ancient" in Kacc.

E.M.