Re: Trans. & Philosophy of SN-1:18:5 [Ko.t.thita Sutta]

Dear Lance,

Thanks for for sharing some of your thoughts on this sutta. The points made
are much appreciated and worthy of consideration.

Here are some of my thoughts about the Pali passage and your translation:

> A literal translation:
> The chandaraaga which arises there in dependence upon both of these is
> the fetter there.

I'm not sure if you have translated "ya.m" although I see a "which" but
"ya.m" does not agree with "chandaraago" in gender and case. I'm still
mulling over the intended meaning of the Pali passage in question and still
far from a satisfactory understanding of the syntax. I have been
thinking of the possibility of "ya.m" being used adverbially and as a
correlative of "ta.m". Abh 1145ab has: ya.m ta.m yato tato yena | teneti
kaara.ne siyu.m ||. Warder, 291f. also has something to say about the use of
the particle "ya.m". On the other hand, if "ya.m" is construed as a relative
pronoun, then I think it would have to agree with tadubhaya.m in gender and
case, i.e., neuter and accusative. If the "ta.m" in the concluding part is
the correlative of a pronominal "ya.m" then this would rule out
"chandaraago" being the fetter.

The a.t.thakathaa and its .tiikaa have very little to say about the sutta.
Only "tadubhaya.m" is commented upon which I reproduce here:

Pañcame tadubhayanti ta.m ubhaya.m. --- Spk III 4
Ta.m ubhayanti ta.m cakkhuruupanti ubhayampi aayatana.m.  --- Spk-p.t 2.322
(Be)

There are some problems with "tattha" in the sense of "there" which I would
rather not go into just now.

Best wishes,
Jim