Re: Kacc 271 (Sutt-nidd)

Jim,

It may be worth mentioning that the analysis of connected text into 'words' is one of the
bases of Indian linguistics.  Classically we see it in the padapaa.tha texts of the Vedas as
opposed to the sa.mhitaapaa.tha.  The pratishaakhyas are statements of the relation
between the two, restricted to a particular veda.  The 'word texts' play a role both in
memorization of the 'connected' (and sacred) texts, and in preserving them in the oral
tradition.  Presumably this role is somewhat different in a Buddhist and/or grammatical
context.

Vibhatyantapada- echoes Panini 1.4.14: supti"nanta.mpada.m (a word is what ends in
-sup [a verbal agreement suffix] or -ti"n [a case and number suffix]).  This sense of pada
has to be distinguished from that in padapaa.tha, which applies to many items (for
instance vaa, but also prefixes like sa.m) which do not meet Panini's definition.  It should
not be surprising that there is no consistency on this point.

Thanks for the reference to GRETIL.  I would appreciate some idea of how to get copies of
the other commentaries you mention.  (If you covered this before, I missed it.)

George Bedell

--- In palistudy@yahoogroups.com, "Jim Anderson" <jimanderson_on@...> wrote:
>
> 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]
>