Dear Lennart, Ole, Chris: thanks for the recommendations about syntax. I'll
do my best to follow these up (I'm very curious).
Hi Bryan:glad you also see the possibility of this sense (an implicit
'theory of language' = also a 'metaphysics') running through it.
Best wishes
with metta
Khristos
On 21 July 2010 23:20, Bryan Levman <bryan.levman@...> wrote:
>
>
> Hi Jim and Khristos and all,
>
> Thank you both for your excellent translation and analysis of the passage.
>
> I think, as Khristos suggests, that there must be a pun to be understood
> between
> saara (heartwood) and sara (Skt. svara, sounds or vowels and the complement
> of
> bya~njana or consonant, letter). The sounds (sara) are the heartwood of the
>
> letters/consonant - i. e. a consonant must have a vowel to go with it
> before it
> is meaningful - at least that's how I interpret it. In Skt. as in Pali,
> every
> consonant has an inherent vowel with it. The sounds/vowels are thus the raw
>
> material (heartwood) which give the consonants their form and allow them to
>
> function to indicate meaning.
>
> When one makes a pada (word or sentence) from solid heartwood (or sounds),
> then
> the box of the letters/consonants is strong and then the jewel of the
> meaning of
> these letters/consonants (together with their sounds) does not
> disappear.The
> word abhidheyya..m is a gerundive ("to be named") modifying attharatana.m,
> and I
> believe tad refers to the bya~njanakara.n.dako, as Jim suggests - i. e. tad
> =
> bya~njanakara.n.dakena. So it would translate as "the jewel of the meaning
> which
> is to be named by the box of letters/consonants..."
>
> A great metaphor and a great reason for studying grammar, etymology, etc.,
>
> Metta, Bryan
>
> ________________________________
> From: Khristos Nizamis <nizamisk@... <nizamisk%40gmail.com>>
> To: palistudy@yahoogroups.com <palistudy%40yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Wed, July 21, 2010 8:01:42 AM
>
> Subject: Re: [palistudy] Mmd-p.t passage regarding Kc 1 (3 of 3)
>
> Hi Jim, I'm happy you enjoyed the verse version! It was really just a
> variation, not an alternative.
>
> Intuitively, as a Pali 'student' here, I agree with you (whom I think of as
> a 'teacher' because of your experience) that the locative construction even
> without a participle can be translated 'when...' (tasmiṃ thire: 'when this
> is strong...'). It's hard for me to find detailed information about Pali
> syntax (I read somewhere that there's something of a gap in that area, is
> that true? Oberlies' grammar is very detailed but doesn't include syntax.
> Duroiselle is good but not very detailed. If you know of something
> worthwhile, please tell me.) but checking up on the Sanskrit grammar makes
> it pretty clear that in Sanskrit the locative absolute doesn't have to have
> a participle: the predicate can also be an adjective or a substantive used
> predicatively (so says Michael Coulson, _Sanskrit: an Introduction to the
> Classical Language_, Ch. 11, who says that ; and this is pretty much
> confirmed also by Whitney, _Sanskrit Grammar_, para. 303d.).
>
> I was unhappy only with my ('poetic licence') addition of 'when' to my
> first
> line - that is definitely not in the original, and it changes the sense of
> the clause: 'Just as a solid heartwood box is solid...' (for "yathā hi
> thirasāramayo karaṇḍako thiro hoti") is like an absolute categorical
> statement (perhaps emphasised by 'hi', if read as emphatic 'indeed,
> certainly', rather than as conjunctive, 'for, because'). 'If a box is made
> of heartwood, it's solid, and that's that.'
>
> But 'Just as, WHEN a solid heartwood box is solid...' differs from the
> original text; and in meaning, it leaves open the possibility that even a
> solid heartwood box might NOT be solid (depending upon how it's
> constructed). I think the Pali clause obviously intends the former sense.
>
> As you no doubt noticed, I also took some licence translating
> "byañjanakaraṇḍako" as "box (made) of sentences", because in the context of
> the metaphor it seemed more logical than 'box (made) of
> consonants/sounds/letters' - given that the 'pada' are already 'formed'.
> Again, I agree that 'solid/strong heartwood' in the metaphor should refer
> to
> the 'letters'/'sounds' (graphemes/phonemes) of the language, and the
> grammatical rules that govern their combinations and formations. I should
> have a look back at your discussion on 'akkhara'. Intuitively/logically,
> since speech preceded writing, wouldn't one expect 'akkhara' (Skt. ak.sara)
> to refer originally to phonemes - vowels, consonants, or rather, given the
> nature of the Vedic/Indian languages, syllables - and later would have been
> applied naturally also to graphemes. (I gather that vowels were sometimes
> called 'sarā' and consonants 'vyañjanā' - would it be going too far, I
> wonder, to suspect a 'pun' between 'sāra' and 'sarā'?!!) As I'm sure you're
> well aware, there was deep spiritual-cosmological significance attached to
> 'language' and its 'fundamental elements' in ancient Indian thought, and I
> have no doubt that this is connected to the root sense of akkhara (ak.sara)
> as 'imperishable, unalterable'. Fascinating (but understandable) that the
> adjective is applied to Nibbāna!
>
> I can agree with your intepretation/analysis of 'tadabhidheyyaṃ'. Unless
> you can find other contexts/usages to compare with, of course it's pretty
> hard to work out anything very clear and definite. I understand that you
> take 'tad' in 'tadabhidheyyaṃ' to refer back to 'byañjanakaraṇḍako'. The
> way it looked to me, I took 'abhidheyyaṃ' as future p.p. (necessity,
> potentiality), 'is to be named', and so took 'tad' as its 'subject', 'that
> (which) is to be named' (is that grammatically legitimate?), and took
> 'tadabhidheyyaṃ' as coordinated to 'attharatanaṃ'. The sense is still that
> the 'naming' is done by the 'byañjanāni', the 'signs' that evoke
> ('contain')
> the meaning (attha). (In the verse version, I had to 'contract' or
> 'simplify' this sense, for metrical reasons!)
>
> Anyway, I'll do my best to keep learning, and to keep trying to reduce the
> number of my errors!
>
> With best wishes, take care,
> metta,
> Khristos
>
> On 20 July 2010 23:37, Jim Anderson <jimanderson_on@...<jimanderson_on%40yahoo.ca>>
> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Hi Khristos,
> >
> > Thanks for your blank verse rendering which makes the passage sound more
> > beautiful. Thanks also for taking the time to look at the introductory
> > verses of the grammar and Kc 1 (the first sutta). There is quite a lot of
> > commentary (about 165 pages!) on those two introductory verses which I
> have
> > hardly touched so far.
> >
> > I know my rendering of the passage is far from perfect and can be much
> > improved upon. I like your "Just" at the beginning where I have "For". I
> > originally had "solid" before I changed it to "strong". There are several
> > locative absolute constructions with a past participle and I wonder if
> > "tasmiṃ thire" can still be translated as "when this is solid" even
> though
> > there is no participle in the phrase.
> >
> > I'm puzzled by tadabhidheyyaṃ in the passage -- your "what’s named
> > therein,"
> > and my "the named (of the phrasing),". At Abh 785 "saddābhidheyye" (loc.)
> > is given as one of nine meanings of "attha". This is the definition for
> > "meaning". It's what the word(s) is/are referring to or pointing at. I
> take
> > it that "tadabhidheyyaṃ" is an adjective qualifying "attharatanaṃ" and
> take
> > byañjanakaraṇḍako as the referent of "tad". The relationship between
> > "byañjanaṃ" and "attho" is that of the "name" and the "named".
> >
> > I take "solid-heartwood" (maybe solid hardwood?) to be the letters only
> > even
> > though the word "akkhara" does not occur in the third part of our
> passage.
> > That can be taken from the first and second parts. Around the end of last
> > year we had quite a discussion about the meaning of akkhara (a sound, a
> > letter, or both?). A study of its etymology does explain the root meaning
> > as
> > something that is imperishable. It is also a synonym for ṇibbāna. An
> > interesting way to look at it is: the 41 akkharas, at the beginning,
> serves
> > as the solid ground or foundation on which to walk towards the
> realization
> > of Akkhara (nibbāna).
> >
> > Best wishes, Jim
> >
> >
> >
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]