Re: Interrogative pronoun at end of sentence

From: Nyanatusita
Message: 4208
Date: 2015-02-04

On 2/4/2015 12:22 AM, 'L.S. Cousins' selwyn@... [palistudy] wrote:
 

Dear Ven. Nyanatusita,

Two things to note about the Kumārapañha and Khuddakapāṭha:

1. The Kumārapañha is a short summary of AN V 50ff. There we have: eko
pañho eko uddeso ekaṃ veyyākaraṇaṃ etc. So ekaṃ nāma kim is referring to
that.

Yes, the Khp commentary also refers to it (ekaṃ nāma kinti bhagavā yasmiṃ ekadhammasmiṃ bhikkhu sammā nibbindamāno anupubbena dukkhassantakaro hoti, yasmiṃ cāyamāyasmā nibbindamāno anupubbena dukkhassantamakāsi, taṃ dhammaṃ sandhāya pañhaṃ pucchati.)
However, some of the items in AN are different:  Instead of the seven bojjhangas of Khp, AN has the seven bases of consciousness; instead of the 8-fold path AN has the 8 worldly dhammas; and instead of the arahant endowed with 10 path factors, AN has the ten paths of unwholesome action. So it is an adapted summary.
If I would make this catechism for boy novices, then I would take the 10 akusalakammapatha since these would be of more relevance to boys than the 10 path factors of the arahant, which has already been mostly covered by the 8-fold path. Or I would take the 8 lokadhamma instead of 8 fold path and then leave the 10 fold path.

Nāma here functions as a quotation marker: “What is 'One'?” and ”one” is an abridgement of ”one dhamma”, ekadhammaṃ. According to von Hinuber (Handbook of Pali Literature § 249), quotations from the old commentaries in the Visuddhimagga show that nāma was used in these works to quote key words instead of ti. This is occasionally also found in the Suttavibhanga,

Perhaps the reason why dhamma was left out is because when the catechism was recited in a monastic class room, it would sound nicer and more emphatic when the teacher would briefly chant 'Ekam kim', etc., (rather than Katamam ekadhammam?) and then the boy monks would recite the answer.


2. The Khuddakapāṭha is listed as part of the contents of the
Khuddakanikāya in various commentaries of the School of Buddhaghosa. So
it predates the fourth/fifth century. Moreover, the very fact that it
was commented on by Buddhaghosa or, more probably, by someone close to
him in time shows that it was already authoritative and a recognised
part of the Canon. Most probably the source for this was the earlier
Sinhaḷa aṭṭhakathā. I would have thought it must precede the third
century as a compilation. If so, it would belong to the period of the
paracanonical texts, not to the commentarial period.


Weren't there different commentarial periods in Sri Lanka? The early period is the period of the Sihalala Atthakatha, then there is the Buddhaghosa & Dhammapala I Atthakatha period, followed by the early Tika period, and the late Tika / Polonnaruwa period. This rough division only applies to the Mahavihara, since the  Andhaka commentaries and commentaries of the Abhayagiri and Jetavana quoted in and referred to in Buddhaghosa's works indicate that other schools also had commentaries.
Isn't there an overlap of the early commentarial period with the period of the paracanonical texts? The Parivara is said to be a work composed in Sri Lanka, at least in part. And the old Sinhalese commentaries were based on earlier Indian commentaries.

Best wishes,
                          Bh Nyanatusita


Lance Cousins

On 03/02/2015 17:46, Nyanatusita nyanatusita@... [palistudy] wrote:
> Dear Lance,
>>
>> But we don't have examples of this usage from the Pali commentaries,
>> only for the ṭīkā period onwards.
>>
>
> Yes. The tikas were written much later. Possibly there are similar
> catechisms for young students in Brahmanical works.
>
>>
>> On the placing of words at the beginning of the sentence in order to
>> emphasize them, see: Bodhiprasiddhinand, P. (2003). /Word order in early
>> Pāli prose texts/, Oxford. D.Phil.
>>
>
> This has not been published.
>
>>
>> As I read the Majjhimanikāya with students, I find many examples of this
>> practice. In this particular case, the numbers are being deliberately
>> emphasized; so the usage is completely appropriate.
>>
>
> This makes sense. I read that Latin poets also did this since in Latin
> too the case endings of words determine the relation of words to the
> others. In English emphasising in this manner is more difficult
> because of the absence of case endings.
>
>> One could also
>> punctuate differently as Petra suggested, but I do not feel comfortable
>> with a sentence consisting of ekaṃ nāma only.
>>
>
> Yes, it feels odd.
>
> Best wishes,
> Bh Nt


Previous in thread: 4206
Next in thread: 4209
Previous message: 4207
Next message: 4209

Contemporaneous posts     Posts in thread     all posts