Re: Dhammapada commentary

Thanks Jim,

There is another common expression in the teachings which may throw some light
on this structure:


"yaṃ ki~nci samudayadhammaṃ, sabbaṃ taṃ nirodhadhamma"nti

Whatever is subject to arising, all of this is subject to cessation.
Here  samudaya and nirodha are masculine but dhammam is neuter, agreeing (I
think) with  ya.m ki~nci (whatever) and sabba.m ta.m (all that or everything)
which are also  neuter.

Also in the Buddha's last words statement that you quote "vayadhammaa
sa"nkhaaraa" we have a nom. plural noun (sa"nkhaaraa), modified by a nom. pl.
compound. I hadn't looked at it as a bahuvriiihi, but you are right, that's what
it is.


So it seems like it's a fairly common structure,

Metta, Bryan




________________________________
From: Jim Anderson <jimanderson_on@...>
To: palistudy@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tue, September 14, 2010 5:21:52 AM
Subject: Re: [palistudy] Dhammapada commentary

  
Hi Bryan,

Thanks for your response. It has made me think again about my earlier
reading. I'm in agreement with your reading and mine can be dismissed
as I can now accept "mara.nadhamma.m" (what is subject to dying or
death) as a nominative neuter bahubbihi noun with "mata.m" as a
passive participle in the sense of "has died" or "is dead". I think
the bahubbihi noun may be referrng to the pa~ncakkhandha.m.

Originally, I was following the adj. + noun pattern of the phrase
"vayadhammaa sa"nkhaaraa" (formations are subject to decay) found in
the last words of the Buddha in the Mahaaparinibbaanasutta.

The "matanti" bit was due to hypothetically taking "mara.nadhamma.m"
and "bhijjanadhamma.m" as the grammatical subjects of
"paccavekkhitabba.m, na  ..." and therefore were outside the range of
"ti". This would give the reading of: what is subject to dying is to
be contemplated upon, not to be grieved over, as "dead"; and similarly
for "what is subject to breaking up".

Best,
Jim






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]