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

Dear Lance,

> But that <fetter> which arises there in dependence upon both of these as
chandarāga is the fetter there.
>
>
> This takes yañ ca as referring back to the previous word saṃyojanaṃ. So
> yañ is nominative neuter as is its correlative taṃ. I take the case of
> tad-ubhayaṃ as governed by paṭicca. Chandarāgo is in apposition to the
> subject of the relative clause i.e. yañ.

I agree with you that ya~n is nominative neuter but not as referring
back to the previous word. It seems to me that the relative clause is part
of Saariputta's definition of sa.myojana.m (the latter word coming at the
end) making it unnecessary to construe ya~n ca as ya.m sa.myojana~n ca. In
your response to Ole, you quoted a paragraph from D II 302 which I had also
looked up earlier in the day. I thought the line: "yañ ca tad ubhayaṃ
paṭicca uppajjati saṃyojanaṃ tañ ca pajānāti," helpful to my understanding
of the ya~n ca tattha passage in question as they share some similarities.
The main difficulty now for me lies with the two tattha-s and chandaraago.
I'm inclined to agree with you that the latter is in apposition to ya~n and
Ole's suggestion of a comma after uppajjati makes sense. For tattha I will
give some thought to the remarks you and Ole have made so far. Saariputta's
definition of sa.myojana.m is very different from that found in As.

> on Unicode:
>
> Eisel's eagle eye spotted that I inadvertently forgot to change one word
> of what I had typed from so-called Unicode to the encoding which I use
> for email to this group. Since his posting came through to me
> reasonably,  like him I wonder if we cannot use Unicode for diacritics
> now. For the Mac at least, the standard fonts such as Times now have all
> the diacritic letters needed for Pali and the same must be true for
> Windows. I suspect that will now be more convenient for most of us.

The subject of the use of Unicode in the group emails has come up a few
times before. My position has been to allow its use but sparingly and to
stick with Velthuis as much as possible. The special characters for Pali do
display correctly in the messages I'm receiving, so I don't see any big
problem with you and others posting messages in Unicode unless we start
getting complaints. If other members find it problematic please let me know.
I would advise against the use of the special characters in the subject
line.

Best wishes,
Jim