Re: A I 1 (ya.m eva.m]

Jim,

I think that yaṃ here is a conjunction corresponding to the Sanskrit use
of yat in the sense of 'that'.

So I would render:
I do not see another single sound that so grips and abides in the mind
of a woman i.e. the sound of a man.

Lance


Jim Anderson wrote:
> Dear Listers,
>
> A I 1:
> 7. ‘‘Nāhaṃ, bhikkhave, aññaṃ ekasaddampi samanupassāmi yaṃ evaṃ itthiyā
> cittaṃ pariyādāya tiṭṭhati yathayidaṃ, bhikkhave, purisasaddo. Purisasaddo,
> bhikkhave, itthiyā cittaṃ pariyādāya tiṭṭhatī’’ti. Sattamaṃ.  (from CST4)
>
> On another list, Tzungkuen asks why the relative pronoun 'yaṃ' is not 'yo'
> in the above sutta. I do not know the answer. Can 'yaṃ' as a nominative
> neuter be the subject of 'tiṭṭhati' in the first sentence? The
> Aṭṭhakathā has the following comment on 'yaṃ evaṃ purisassa cittaṃ
> pariyādāya tiṭṭhati' in the first sutta of the same vagga:
>
> Mp I 19:
> Yaṃ evaṃ purisassa cittaṃ pariyādāya tiṭṭhatīti yaṃ rūpaṃ rūpagarukassa
> purisassa catubhūmakakusalacittaṃ pariyādiyitvā gaṇhitvā khepetvā tiṭṭhati.
> (from CST4)
>
> >From this, I take it that 'yaṃ' in 'yaṃ evaṃ' qualifies rūpaṃ and is
> therefore a relative pronoun in the nominative and the subject of tiṭṭhati.
> But the problem with yaṃ in the seventh sutta is that one would expect a
> 'yo' (qualifying 'saddo' like 'yaṃ rūpaṃ'). One explanation could be that
> 'yaṃ' is accusative masculine and in agreement with 'ekasaddaṃ' and somehow
> (I don't know how) the following 'evaṃ' makes it possible for it to function
> also as the subject of 'tiṭṭhati'. Another possibility is that if 'yaṃ' is
> the correlative of 'idaṃ' in 'yathayidaṃ' (yathaa idaṃ = like this) it also
> has to be nominative neuter and read it as 'yo saddo'.
>
> So, is 'yaṃ' a nominative neuter, an accusative neuter, an accusative
> masculine, or something else?
>
> Best wishes,
> Jim
>