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

J.A.,

> I'm not sure if you have translated "ya.m" ...
> I have been
> thinking of the possibility of "ya.m" being used adverbially and as a
> correlative of "ta.m".

I already stated my astonishment at L.C.'s suggestion that this is
anything other than a correlative pairing --and he replies saying that
he agrees with me that it is, and that he did not mean to suggest
otherwise.

In any case, it seems that you (J.A.), also, in reading his former
posting, thought that L.C. was choosing not to read this as a
correlative pair (or to argue against such a reading) --so, perhaps, I
was not wildly hallucinating at the time.

> 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.

Correct.

E.M.