Re: Question about Bodhikumara Sutta

From: KHANH TRONG HUYNH
Message: 4686
Date: 2016-08-26

Dear Prof Bryan,

Thanks so much for your support.

[1]  About YE:  Yes, I also realized it is neuter nom. accus. pronoun, but I still felt embarrassed

[2]  About abhiññā:  My Pali Teacher advised me that it is abhinnaya (instrumental) according to commentary of Vinaya

Anyway, it is so interesting to see how many explanations there are 

Sincerely yours,

Huynh Trong Khanh



From: "Bryan Levman bryan.levman@... [palistudy]" <palistudy@yahoogroups.com>
To: "palistudy@yahoogroups.com" <palistudy@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, August 26, 2016 8:10 AM
Subject: Re: [palistudy] Question about Bodhikumara Sutta

 
Dear Huỳnh Trọng Khánh ,

The form ye, is per Geiger §110.2 a "magadhism" for taṃ, that is the neuter nom. accus. pronoun. So it would have the meaning "because" in that context or perhaps "that" as you suggest (see MW sv tad).

Yāhaṃ must be a contraction of yaṃ ahaṃ (dhammaṃ), being the relative pronoun for the correlative taṃ dhammaṃ. ("That dhamma, which I have understood well for myself, realized for myself, entered into, and declare, you, having understood it for yourself, realized it, entered into, abide in."


abhiññā is a gerund, not a noun (although the form is the same).

I don't agree with you about Latin, Greek and Pāli but that's another discussion.

Hope that helps,

Best wishes, Bryan



From: "KHANH TRONG HUYNH testsuda@... [palistudy]" <palistudy@yahoogroups.com>
To: yahoogroups <palistudy@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2016 10:43 AM
Subject: [palistudy] Question about Bodhikumara Sutta

 
Dear all,

I am translating the Bodhikumara Sutta, I have faced 2 strange points:

[1]  Lābhā no, āvuso, suladdhaṁ no, āvuso, YE mayaṁ āyasmantaṁ tādisaṁ sabrahmacāriṁ passāma.

= It is indeed gain, friend, it is indeed great success, THAT we see such venerable (to be) our brahma-practician

I do not know the function of YE here.  It seems to refer to Lābhā and suladdhaṃ, but rather takes the role of Conjunction

[2]  Iti YĀHAṀ Dhammaṁ sayaṁ abhiññā, sacchikatvā upasampajja pavedemi, taṁ tvaṁ Dhammaṁ sayaṁ abhiññā, sacchikatvā upasampajja viharasi. 

= Thus I myself by superknowledge having experienced and attainted that Dhamma, declare, you yourself by superknowledge having experienced and attainted that Dhamma, live.

The compound YĀHAṂ here is very strange.  Ven Anandajoti has advised me to take it as:  YĀ + AHAṂ and YĀ refer to abhiññā.  However, after considering following sentences and trying to take it as close to the normal-structure as possible, I guess it is YAṂ + AHAṂ and is ruled by a irregular SANDHI law here.

Please kindly give me your advices.

@  In my opinion, the Pali language has so much irregularities comparing with Latin and Ancient Greek.  I see in Latin and Ancient Greek literature, there is almost nothing that scholars and grammarians could not explain, while in Pali we have so much such things.  I do not why, I guess it could be due to the fact that there was no one like Panini to fix its grammar.

Sincerely yours,

Huỳnh Trọng Khánh   








Previous in thread: 4685
Previous message: 4685
Next message: 4687

Contemporaneous posts     Posts in thread     all posts