Kacc 271 (Sutt-nidd)

In addition to the Kaccaayanavutti, there are several other grammatical
commentaries on the Kaccaayana suttas. These include, in chronological
order, Vajirabuddhi's Mukhamattadiipanii or Nyaasa (11th cent.?),
Buddhappiya's Ruupasiddhi and its .tiikaa (12th cent.), Saddhammajotipaala's
Kaccaayanasuttaniddesa (15th cent.), Mahaavijitaavin's Kaccaayanava.n.nanaa
(17th cent.), and the Kaccaayanatthadiipanii (20th cent.). It is also worth
consulting similar material in the traditional Sanskrit grammars and their
commentaries as well, as these may be helpful in shedding more light on the
many obscurities found in the Pali grammatical treatises.

I thought it might be good to begin with an extract from the
Kaccaayanasuttaniddesa (Sutt-nidd or Chap). Here's a transliteration of the
first few lines from a modern Thai script edition published by Buddhaghosa
College, Nakhorn Pathom, 2001:

[271 : 308] yasmaadapeti bhayamaadatte vaa tadapaadaana.m.

tattha yasmaati eka.m pada.m. apetiiti eka.m pada.m. bhayanti eka.m pada.m.
aadatteti eka.m pada.m. vaati eka.m pada.m. tanti eka.m pada.m. apaadaananti
eka.m pada.m. vibhatyantapadavibhaagavasena sattapadamidanti da.t.thabba.m.
[from p. 96 of the Thai text]

The entire commentarial passage on Kacc 271 (273 in the Sinhalese and Senart
numbering) runs to about 4 pages. The Kaarakakappa actually begins on the
previous page with a general discussion on the kaarakas which I intend to
get into later on. "tattha" (therein) refers to Kacc 271 (sutta alone). What
follows is a division of the sutta into seven words. Mahaavijitaavin calls
this type of analysis a padaccheda. I notice something similar in S.C.
Vasu's edn. and transl. of Paa.nini's A.s.taadhyaayii in that immediately
after each suutra he provides a list of the words (padaani) found therein.

In "vibhatyantapadavibhaagavasena" (by way of an analysis of words having
the vibhatti terminations), I'm puzzled by this phrasing as "vaa" doesn't
seem to belong. I understand "vibhatyantapada-" to refer to words that are
inflected (verbs and nouns) and should not include particles (nipaatas) such
as "vaa".

In "sattapadamidanti" (satta-padam ida.m iti), I think "sutta.m" is
understood to come after "ida.m". This would be a case of ellipsis.

Best wishes,
Jim
p.s. I see that one can now download Pata~njali's Mahaabhaa.sya (based on F.
Kielhorn's edn.) from GRETIL or George Cardona's webpage. This is a very old
Sanskrit grammatical commentary (circa 3rd cent. BC) on Kaatyaayana's
vaartikas on the Paninian suutras.


---
[This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]