Question on Sabhiya sutta commentary

Dear Friends,

I have been trying to understand verse 538 in the Sabhiya sutta (Sutta Nipaata) which reads:



“yaani ca tii.ni yaani ca sa.t.thi, sama.nappavaadasitaani bhuuripa~n~na.

sa~n~nakkharasa~n~nanissitaani, osara.naani vineyya oghatamagaa.



especially the compound sa~n~na-akkhara-sa~n~na-nissitaani,

Norman translates (Group of Discourses), 65:

One of great wisdom, you have gone [over] the darkness of the flood, having dispelled the three and sixty heresies, which are dependent upon the utterances of ascetics and dependent upon perceptions and conventions of perceptions.

The word sa~n~naa here seems to be more related to "names" or "conceptions, ideas" per the commentary (PJ II 2, 434):

eva.m pa~nhabyaakara.nena tu.t.thassa pana sabhiyassa “yaani ca tii.nii”tiaadiisu abhitthavanagaathaasu osara.naaniiti ogaha.naani titthaani, di.t.thiyoti attho. taani yasmaa sakkaayadi.t.thiyaa saha brahmajaale vuttadvaasa.t.thidi.t.thigataani gahetvaa tesa.t.thi honti, yasmaa ca taani a~n~natitthiyasama.naana.m pavaadabhuutaani satthaani sitaani upadisitabbavasena, na uppattivasena. uppattivasena pana yadeta.m “itthii puriso”ti sa~n~nakkhara.m vohaaranaama.m, yaa caaya.m micchaaparivitakkaanussavaadivasena “evaruupena attanaa bhavitabban”ti baalaana.m vipariitasa~n~naa uppajjati, tadubhayanissitaani tesa.m vasena uppajjanti, na attapaccakkhaani. taani ca bhagavaa vineyya vinayitvaa oghatamagaa oghatama.m oghandhakaara.m agaa atikkanto. “oghantamagaa”tipi paa.tho, oghaana.m anta.m agaa, tasmaa aaha “yaani ca tii.ni … pe … tamagaa”ti.



which I tentatively tranlsate as

In
this way, with the answering of the questions of the satisfied Sabhiya, he said yāni
ca tini, etc. in respect of these gāthās of praise. “osaraṇāni ” are the heresies
of the sects, their beliefs – that is the meaning. These (heresies), because they have taken
the 62 views described in the Brahmajāla
sutta, together with the view of individual, number sixty-three, and
because they  are dependent (sitāni)  on the teachings (satthāni), produced by the discussions of the ascetics and members
of other sects, on account of that which is to be  taught  (by them? upadisitabba-vasena), they are not uppattivasena (arisen by themselves?
lit: “on account of coming forth”). But  that which does arise by itself is the name
and expression vohaarananaama.m), the conception and the name (sa~n~nkkhara.m), that is  “woman, man”, which arises as an inverted
perception/conception of fools, who think “Of such a form [man or woman] the self must be”
because of [the force of     past ] tradition and false mental conception, etc., - because
of these, dependencies on both of these things arise, which are not realized by/evident
to the self. These (afflictions) the Blessed One has put away. He has gone over
the darkness of the flood, oghan-tam’-agā  (aghantamagā)
is another reading, he has gone to the end of the flood.”

My question is - what does upadistabbavasena mean and how does it fit into the syntax of the sentence? Same for uppattiyavasena?
upadistabba is the future passive participle of upadisati to teach, point out, so means "to be taught," or "to be pointed out" and vasena is the normal adverb for "on account of" or because. uppatti, means "coming forth, origin, product."

I think I understand the gist of the argument which is that most wrong views are made through discussion, and only one wrong view - the view of the personality or self, arises on its own because of the use of language to name things. However, I'm not sure what the two compounds with -vasena mean and how they fit into the grammatical structure.

Any help would be appreciated,

Metta, Bryan

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